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.
Background: Improving physical activity, especially in combination with optimizing protein intake, after surgery has a potential positive effect on recovery of physical functioning in patients after gastrointestinal and lung cancer surgery. The aim of this randomized controlled trial is to evaluate the efficacy of a blended intervention to improve physical activity and protein intake after hospital discharge on recovery of physical functioning in these patients. Methods: In this multicenter single-blinded randomized controlled trial, 161 adult patients scheduled for elective gastrointestinal or lung cancer surgery will be randomly assigned to the intervention or control group. The purpose of the Optimal Physical Recovery After Hospitalization (OPRAH) intervention is to encourage self-management of patients in their functional recovery, by using a smartphone application and corresponding accelerometer in combination with coaching by a physiotherapist and dietician during three months after hospital discharge. Study outcomes will be measured prior to surgery (baseline) and one, four, eight, and twelve weeks and six months after hospital discharge. The primary outcome is recovery in physical functioning six months after surgery, and the most important secondary outcome is physical activity. Other outcomes include lean body mass, muscle mass, protein intake, symptoms, physical performance, self-reported limitations in activities and participation, self-efficacy, hospital readmissions and adverse events. Discussion: The results of this study will demonstrate whether a blended intervention to support patients increasing their level of physical activity and protein intake after hospital discharge improves recovery in physical functioning in patients after gastrointestinal and lung cancer surgery. Trial registration: The trial has been registered at the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform at 14–10-2021 with registration number NL9793. Trial registration data are presented in Table 1.
Background: A transitional care pathway (TCP) could improve care for older patients in the last months of life. However, barriers exist such as unidentified palliative care needs and suboptimal collaboration between care settings. The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of a TCP, named PalliSupport, for older patients at the end of life, prior to a stepped-wedge randomized controlled trial. Methods: A mixed-method feasibility study was conducted at one hospital with affiliated primary care. Patients were ≥ 60 years and acutely hospitalized. The intervention consisted of (1) training on early identification of the palliative phase and end of life conversations, (2) involvement of a transitional palliative care team during admission and post-discharge and (3) intensified collaboration between care settings. Outcomes were feasibility of recruitment, data collection, patient burden and protocol adherence. Experiences of 14 professionals were assessed through qualitative interviews. Results: Only 16% of anticipated participants were included which resulted in difficulty assessing other feasibility criteria. The qualitative analysis identified misunderstandings about palliative care, uncertainty about professionals' roles and difficulties in initiating end of life conversations as barriers. The training program was well received and professionals found the intensified collaboration beneficial for patient care. The patients that participated experienced low burden and data collection on primary outcomes and protocol adherence seems feasible. Discussion: This study highlights the importance of performing a feasibility study prior to embarking on effectiveness studies. Moving forward, the PalliSupport care pathway will be adjusted to incorporate a more active recruitment approach, additional training on identification and palliative care, and further improvement on data collection.
