Paediatric palliative home care with Internet-based video-phones: lessons learnt

We have designed and tested an Internet-based video-phone suitable for use in the homes of families in need of paediatric palliative care services. The equipment uses an ordinary telephone line and includes a PC, Web camera and modem housed in a custom-made box. In initial field testing, six clinical consultations were conducted in a one-month trial of the videophone with a family in receipt of palliative care services who were living in the outer suburbs of Brisbane. Problems with variability in call quality-namely audio and video freezing, and audio break-up-prompted further laboratory testing. We completed a programme of over 250 test calls. Fixing modem connection parameters to use the V.34 modulation protocol at a set bandwidth of 24 kbit/s improved connection stability and the reliability of the video-phone. In subsequent field testing 47 of 50 calls (94%) connected without problems. The freezes that did occur were brief (with greatly reduced packet loss) and had little effect on the ability to communicate, unlike the problems arising in the home testing. The low-bandwidth Internet-based video-phone we have developed provides a feasible means of doing telemedicine in the home.

Palliative care at home: general practitioners working with palliative care teams

Home care is the preferred option for most people with a terminal illness. Providing home care relies on good community-based services, and a general practice workforce competent in palliative care practice and willing to accommodate patients' needs. Structured palliative care training of general practitioners is needed at undergraduate and postgraduate level, with attention to barriers to teamwork and communication. Good palliative care-can be delivered to patients at home by GPs (supported by specialist palliative care teams) and community nurses, with access to an inpatient facility when required. To optimise patient care, careful planning and good communication between all members of the healthcare team is crucial.

How well do general practitioners deliver palliative care? A systematic review

General practitioners (GPs) deliver the majority of palliative care to patients in the last year of life. This article seeks to examine the nature of GP care, perceptions of the GPs themselves and others of that care, the adequacy of palliative care training, issues relating to accessibility of GPs to palliative care patients, and strategies that may be of use in encouraging more effective delivery of palliative care by GPs. Medline and PubMed databases from 1966 to 2000 were searched, and 135 references identified. Sixty-six of these described studies relevant to GP palliative care. GPs value this part of their work. Most of the time, patients appreciate the contribution the GP makes to palliative care particularly if the GP is accessible, takes time to listen, allows patient and carer to ventilate their feelings, and is seen to be making efforts made regarding symptom relief. However, reports from bereaved relatives suggest that palliative care is performed less well in the community than in other settings. GPs express discomfort about their competence to perform palliative care adequately. They tend to miss symptoms which are not treatable by them, or which are less common. However, with appropriate specialist support and facilities, GPs have been shown to deliver sound and effective care. GP comfort working with specialist teams increases with exposure to this form of patient management, as does the understanding of the potential other team members have in contributing to the care of the patient. Formal arrangements engaging GPs to work with specialist teams have been shown to improve functional outcomes, patient satisfaction, improve effective use of resources and improve effective physician behaviour in other areas of medicine. Efforts by specialist services to develop formal involvement of GPs in the care of individual patients, may be an effective method of improving GP palliative care skills and appreciation of the roles specialist services can play.

A randomised trial of home vs hospital intravenous antibiotic therapy in adults with infectious diseases

Objective. Despite widespread adoption of home care services, few randomised trials have compared health outcomes in the hospital and at home. We report a prospective, randomised trial of home versus hospital therapy in adults receiving intravenous (IV) antibiotics. Our objective was to show that home care is a feasible alternative to hospitalisation over a broad range of infections, without compromise to quality of life (QOL) or clinical outcomes. Methods. Consenting adults requiring IV antibiotics were randomised to complete therapy at home or in hospital. Short Form 36 and Perceived Health Competence Scale (PHCS) were used for assessment of QOL. Statistical analysis used unpaired t-tests, Mann-Whitney tests and ANOVA. Results. One hundred and twenty-nine admissions were referred. Recruitment was hampered by patient preference for one therapy over another. 82 (62%) were included and randomised: 44 to home, 38 to hospital; the two groups had comparable characteristics. There were no differences in improvements in QOL and PHCS scores between the two groups after treatment. Treatment duration was median 11.5 days (range 3 - 57) and 11 days (range 4 - 126) for home and hospital groups, respectively. Home therapy costs, approximately, half that of hospital therapy. Time to readmission was longer after hospital therapy. Conclusion. Out study showed that home IV therapy is welt tolerated, is less costly, is not associated with any major disadvantage to QOL or clinical outcomes compared to hospital therapy, and is an appropriate treatment option for selected patients. (C) 2003 The British Infection Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Carvedilol reduces the costs of medical care in severe heart failure: An economic analysis of the COPERNICUS study applied to the United Kingdom

Background: The aim of this study was to determine the effects of carvedilol on the costs related to the treatment of severe chronic heart failure (CHF). Methods: Costs for the treatment for heart failure within the National Health Service (NHS) in the United Kingdom (UK) were applied to resource utilisation data prospectively collected in all patients randomized into the Carvedilol Prospective Randomized Cumulative Survival (COPERNICUS) Study. Unit-specific, per them (hospital bed day) costs were used to calculate expenditures due to hospitalizations. We also included costs of carvedilol treatment, general practitioner surgery/office visits, hospital out-patient clinic visits and nursing home care based on estimates derived from validated patterns of clinical practice in the UK. Results: The estimated cost of carvedilol therapy and related ambulatory care for the 1156 patients assigned to active treatment was 530,771 pound (44.89 pound per patient/month of follow-up). However, patients assigned to carvedilol were hospitalised less often and accumulated fewer and less expensive days of admission. Consequently, the total estimated cost of hospital care was 3.49 pound million in the carvedilol group compared with 4.24 pound million for the 1133 patients in the placebo arm. The cost of post-discharge care was also less in the carvedilol than in the placebo group (479,200 pound vs. 548,300) pound. Overall, the cost per patient treated in the carvedilol group was 3948 pound compared to 4279 pound in the placebo group. This equated to a cost of 385.98 pound vs. 434.18 pound, respectively, per patient/month of follow-up: an 11.1% reduction in health care costs in favour of carvedilol. Conclusions: These findings suggest that not only can carvedilol treatment increase survival and reduce hospital admissions in patients with severe CHF but that it can also cut costs in the process.

A pragmatic 2 × 2 × 2 factorial cluster randomized controlled trial of educational outreach visiting and case conferencing in palliative care—methodology of the Palliative Care Trial [ISRCTN 81117481]

The demand for palliative care is increasing, yet there are few data on the best models of care nor well-validated interventions that translate current evidence into clinical practice. Supporting multidisciplinary patient-centered palliative care while successfully conducting a large clinical trial is a challenge. The Palliative Care Trial (PCT) is a pragmatic 2 x 2 x 2 factorial cluster randomized controlled trial that tests the ability of educational outreach visiting and case conferencing to improve patient-based outcomes such as performance status and pain intensity. Four hundred sixty-one consenting patients and their general practitioners (GPs) were randomized to the following: (1) GP educational outreach visiting versus usual care, (2) Structured patient and caregiver educational outreach visiting versus usual care and (3) A coordinated palliative care model of case conferencing versus the standard model of palliative care in Adelaide, South Australia (3:1 randomization). Main outcome measures included patient functional status over time, pain intensity, and resource utilization. Participants were followed longitudinally until death or November 30, 2004. The interventions are aimed at translating current evidence into clinical practice and there was particular attention in the trial's design to addressing common pitfalls for clinical studies in palliative care. Given the need for evidence about optimal interventions and service delivery models that improve the care of people with life-limiting illness, the results of this rigorous, high quality clinical trial will inform practice. Initial results are expected in mid 2005. (c) 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Cost of an emerging epidemic: an economic analysis of atrial fibrillation in the UK

Objective: To evaluate the cost of atrial fibrillation (AF) to health and social services in the UK in 1995 and, based on epidemiological trends, to project this estimate to 2000. Design, setting, and main outcome measures: Contemporary estimates of health care activity related to AF were applied to the whole population of the UK on an age and sex specific basis for the year 1995. The activities considered ( and costs calculated) were hospital admissions, outpatient consultations, general practice consultations, and drug treatment ( including the cost of monitoring anticoagulant treatment). By adjusting for the progressive aging of the British population and related increases in hospital admissions, the cost of AF was also projected to the year 2000. Results: There were 534 000 people with AF in the UK during 1995. The direct'' cost of health care for these patients was pound 244 million (similar toE350 million) or 0.62% of total National Health Service ( NHS) expenditure. Hospitalisations and drug prescriptions accounted for 50% and 20% of this expenditure, respectively. Long term nursing home care after hospital admission cost an additional pound46.4 million (similar toE66 million). The direct cost of AF rose to pound459 million (similar toE655 million) in 2000, equivalent to 0.97% of total NHS expenditure based on 1995 figures. Nursing home costs rose to pound111 million (similar toE160 million). Conclusions: AF is an extremely costly public health problem.

Heart failure management programmes in Europe

Background The ESC guidelines recommend that an organised system of specialist heart failure (HF) care should be established to improve outcomes of HF patients. The aim of this study was therefore to identify the number and the content of HF management programmes in Europe. Method A two-phase descriptive study was conducted: an initial screening to identify the existence of HF management programmes; and a survey to describe the content in countries where at least 30% of the hospitals had a programme. Results Of the 43 European countries approached, 26 (60%) estimated the percentage of HF management programmes. Seven countries reported that they had such programmes in more than 30% of their hospitals. Of the 673 hospitals responding to the questionnaire, 426 (63%) had a HF management programme. Half of the programmes (n = 205) were located in an outpatient clinic. In the UK a combination of hospital and home-based programmes was common (75%). The most programmes included physical examination, telephone consultation, patient education, drug titration and diagnostic testing. Most (89%) programmes involved nurses and physicians. Multi-disciplinary teams were active in 56% of the HF programmes. The most prominent differences between the 7 countries were the degree of collaboration with home care and GP's, the role in palliative care and the funding. Conclusion Only a few European countries have a large number of organised programmes for HF care and follow up. To improve outcomes of HF patients throughout Europe more effort should be taken to increase the number of these programmes in all countries.