Perceptions of the Nurse Practitioner Role in Facilitating the Implementation of an Onsite Pain Management Team in Long Term Care

Background: One strategy to improve pain management in long term care (LTC) is to optimize the emerging role of the nurse practitioner (NP) in LTC. The purpose of this sub study was to learn about the NP role in implementing an onsite, interdisciplinary Pain Team in the LTC home setting.

Methods: We used a case study design that included two NPs who worked at separate LTC homes. Each of the NPs completed a weekly questionnaire of pain-related activities that they engaged in over a one-year implementation period; and a diary, using critical reflection, about their experiences and strategies used to implement the Pain Team. Descriptive statistics and thematic content analysis were used to analyze the case study data.

Findings: NPs tended to be most engaged in pain assessment and collaborated more with licensed nurses and personal support workers; less with pharmacists. NPs were more involved in organizational level activities, such as participating in committee work or assisting with the development of policies and procedures about pain. NPs created palliative care and pain service protocols; engaged in policy development, in-servicing, quality assurance and advocacy; and encouraged best practices. NPs were challenged with time constraints for pain management and balancing other role priorities and felt that increased scope of practice for them was needed.

Conclusions: The results of this study highlight how NPs implemented a Pain Team in LTC which may be helpful to others interested in implementing a similar strategy to reduce residents’ pain.

Are family physician visits and continuity of care associated with acute care use at end-of-life? A population-based cohort study of homecare cancer patients

Background: Previous end-of-life cancer research has shown an association between increased family physician continuity of care and reduced use of acute care services; however, it did not focus on a homecare population or control for homecare nursing.

Aim: Among end-of-life homecare cancer patients, to investigate the association of family physician continuity with location of death and hospital and emergency department visits in the last 2 weeks of life while controlling for nursing hours.

Design: Retrospective population-based cohort study.

Setting/participants: Cancer patients with ≥1 family physician visit in 2006 from Ontario, Canada. Family physician continuity of care was assessed using two measures: Modified Usual Provider of Care score and visits/week. Its association with location of death and hospital and emergency department visits in the last 2 weeks of life was examined using logistic regression.

Results: Of 9467 patients identified, the Modified Usual Provider of Care score demonstrated a dose-response relationship with increasing continuity associated with decreased odds of hospital death and visiting the hospital and emergency department in the last 2 weeks of life. More family physician visits/week were associated with lower odds of an emergency department visit in the last 2 weeks of life and hospital death, except for patients with greater than 4 visits/week, where they had increased odds of hospitalizations and hospital deaths.

Conclusions: These results demonstrate an association between increased family physician continuity of care and decreased odds of several acute care outcomes in late life, controlling for homecare nursing and other covariates.©The Author(s) 2013 Reprints and permissions sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav.

Factors affecting the successful implementation and sustainability of the Liverpool Care Pathway for dying patients – a realist evaluation

Objectives: The Liverpool Care Pathway for the dying patient (LCP) was designed to improve end-of-life care in generalist health care settings. Controversy has led to its withdrawal in some jurisdictions. The main objective of this research was to identify the influences that facilitated or hindered successful LCP implementation.

Method: An organisational case study using realist evaluation in one health and social care trust in Northern Ireland. Two rounds of semi-structured interviews were conducted with two policy makers and twenty two participants with experience and/or involvement in management of the LCP during 2011 and 2012.

Results: Key resource inputs included facilitation with a view to maintaining LCP ‘visibility’, reducing anxiety among nurses and increasing their confidence regarding the delivery of end-of-life care; and nurse and medical education designed to increase professional self-efficacy and reduce misuse and misunderstanding of the LCP. Key enabling contexts were consistent senior management support; ongoing education and training tailored to the needs of each professional group; and an organisational cultural change in the hospital setting that encompassed end-of-life care.

Conclusion: There is a need to appreciate the organizationally complex nature of intervening to improve end-of-life care. Successful implementation of evidence-based interventions for end-of-life care requires commitment to planning, training and ongoing review that takes account of different perspectives, institutional hierarchies and relationships and the educational needs of professional disciplines. There is a need also to recognise that medical consultants require particular support in their role as gatekeepers and as a lead communication channel with patients and their relatives.

Metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: a benchmark for quality end-of-life cancer care?

Objectives: To investigate the quality of end-of-life care for patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Design and participants: Retrospective cohort study of patients from first hospitalisation for metastatic disease until death, using hospital, emergency department and death registration data from Victoria, Australia, between 1 July 2003 and 30 June 2010. Main outcome measures: Emergency department and hospital use; aggressiveness of care including intensive care and chemotherapy in last 30 days; palliative and supportive care provision; and place of death. Results: Metastatic NSCLC patients underwent limited aggressive treatment such as intensive care (5%) and chemotherapy (< 1%) at the end of life; however, high numbers died in acute hospitals (42%) and 61% had a length of stay of greater than 14 days in the last month of life. Although 62% were referred to palliative care services, this occurred late in the illness. In a logistic regression model adjusted for year of metastasis, age, sex, metastatic site and survival, the odds ratio (OR) of dying in an acute hospital bed compared with death at home or in a hospice unit decreased with receipt of palliative care (OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.21–0.30) and multimodality supportive care (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.56–0.75). Conclusion: Because early palliative care for patients with metastatic NSCLC is recommended, we propose that this group be considered a benchmark of quality end-of-life care. Future work is required to determine appropriate quality-of-care targets in this and other cancer patient cohorts, with particular focus on the timeliness of palliative care engagement.