18 resultados para Care partnership
Resumo:
Background: Internationally concerns have been highlighted about the quality of palliative care that people with intellectual disability receive. It has also been evidenced that people with intellectual disabilities are seldom referred to hospice and palliative care services.
Aims: This study aimed to explore the experience of health and social care professionals in providing palliative care to people with intellectual disabilities.
Methods An exploratory, qualitative design was used. A purposive sample of thirty health and social care professionals, working in intellectual disability and palliative care services, who had provided end-of-life care to adults with intellectual disabilities, were recruited to the study following informed consent. They were asked to reflect on a case scenario of a person with intellectual disability to whom they had provided end of life care. A semi-structured interview technique, with open questions and prompts, was used to explore their experiences and insights. The narrative from the case scenarios were content analysed using a recognised framework.
Results: Three themes emerged from the data within the case scenarios: Identifying end of life care needs, meeting support needs and empowerment in partnership. Examples of good practice and issues in practice were apparent.
Conclusion/ Discussion: This study contributes to the developing international evidence base to enhance end of life care for people with intellectual disabilities and provides further insights into this area of practice. Funder: HSC Research and Development Doctoral Fellowship Scheme
Resumo:
Action Plan B3 of the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing (EIP on AHA) focuses on the integrated care of chronic diseases. Area 5 (Care Pathways) was initiated using chronic respiratory diseases as a model. The chronic respiratory disease action plan includes (1) AIRWAYS integrated care pathways (ICPs), (2) the joint initiative between the Reference site MACVIA-LR (Contre les MAladies Chroniques pour un VIeillissement Actif) and ARIA (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma), (3) Commitments for Action to the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing and the AIRWAYS ICPs network. It is deployed in collaboration with the World Health Organization Global Alliance against Chronic Respiratory Diseases (GARD). The European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing has proposed a 5-step framework for developing an individual scaling up strategy: (1) what to scale up: (1-a) databases of good practices, (1-b) assessment of viability of the scaling up of good practices, (1-c) classification of good practices for local replication and (2) how to scale up: (2-a) facilitating partnerships for scaling up, (2-b) implementation of key success factors and lessons learnt, including emerging technologies for individualised and predictive medicine. This strategy has already been applied to the chronic respiratory disease action plan of the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing.
Resumo:
Objectives This paper describes the methods used in the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership Module 4 Survey (ICBPM4) which examines time intervals and routes to cancer diagnosis in 10 jurisdictions. We present the study design with defining and measuring time intervals, identifying patients with cancer, questionnaire development, data management and analyses.
Design and setting Recruitment of participants to the ICBPM4 survey is based on cancer registries in each jurisdiction. Questionnaires draw on previous instruments and have been through a process of cognitive testing and piloting in three jurisdictions followed by standardised translation and adaptation. Data analysis focuses on comparing differences in time intervals and routes to diagnosis in the jurisdictions.
Participants Our target is 200 patients with symptomatic breast, lung, colorectal and ovarian cancer in each jurisdiction. Patients are approached directly or via their primary care physician (PCP). Patients’ PCPs and cancer treatment specialists (CTSs) are surveyed, and ‘data rules’ are applied to combine and reconcile conflicting information. Where CTS information is unavailable, audit information is sought from treatment records and databases.
Main outcomes Reliability testing of the patient questionnaire showed that agreement was complete (κ=1) in four items and substantial (κ=0.8, 95% CI 0.333 to 1) in one item. The identification of eligible patients is sufficient to meet the targets for breast, lung and colorectal cancer. Initial patient and PCP survey response rates from the UK and Sweden are comparable with similar published surveys. Data collection was completed in early 2016 for all cancer types.
Conclusion An international questionnaire-based survey of patients with cancer, PCPs and CTSs has been developed and launched in 10 jurisdictions. ICBPM4 will help to further understand international differences in cancer survival by comparing time intervals and routes to cancer diagnosis.