A Qualitative Exploration of Perceived Key Knowledge and Skills in End-of-Life Care in Dementia Patients among Medical, Nursing, and Pharmacy Students

Background: The steady increase in the number of people living and dying with dementia, coupled with the recent focus on quality of care, has highlighted the importance of dementia training for health care professionals. This exploratory study aimed to discover which skills health care students felt were important in providing quality end-of-life care to dementia patients.

Methods: Ninety-four medicine, nursing, and pharmacy students participated in a larger study using open-ended and closed questions to explore attitudes related to caring for dementia patients at the end of life. This study looks at the student responses to an open-ended question regarding the skills and knowledge they believe are needed to provide end-of-life care to dementia patients. Individual responses were reviewed by the researchers, coded into key issues, and tabulated for frequency of occurrences and group differences.

Results: Several common issues emerged: knowledge, patience, empathy, understanding, family involvement, compassion, medication knowledge, respect/patient autonomy, communication, quality of life, and patient education. Significant differences were observed among the participant groups on the following issues: Patience and understanding (pharmacy students mentioned these issues less frequently than medical and nursing students), compassion (medical students mentioned this issue more frequently than pharmacy students), and medication knowledge (pharmacy students mentioned this issue more frequently than medical and nursing students).

Conclusions: Different health care disciplines (in-training) value different skill sets for the provision of dementia care at the end-of-life. As health care education for dementia patients at the end of life is expanded, it will be important to understand which skills both patients and health care students value.

Health professionals' and service users' perspectives of shared care for monitoring wet age-related macular degeneration: a qualitative study alongside the ECHoES trial

Objectives: To explore the views of eye health professionals and service users on shared community and hospital care for wet or neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD).

Method: Using maximum variation sampling, 5 focus groups and 10 interviews were conducted with 23 service users and 24 eye health professionals from across the UK (consisting of 8 optometrists, 6 ophthalmologists, 6 commissioners, 2 public health representatives and 2 clinical eye care advisors to local Clinical Commissioning Groups). Data were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically using constant comparative techniques derived from grounded theory methodology.

Results: The needs and preferences of those with nAMD appear to be at odds with the current service being provided. There was enthusiasm among health professionals and service users about the possibility of shared care for nAMD as it was felt to have the potential to relieve hospital eye service burden and represent a more patient-centred option, but there were a number of perceived barriers to implementation. Some service users and ophthalmologists voiced concerns about optometrist competency and the potential for delays with referrals to secondary care if stable nAMD became active again. The health professionals were divided as to whether shared care was financially more efficient than the current model of care. Specialist training for optometrists, under the supervision of ophthalmologists, was deemed to be the most effective method of training and was perceived to have the potential to improve the communication and trust that shared care would require.

Conclusions: While shared care is perceived to represent a promising model of nAMD care, voiced concerns suggest that there would need to be greater collaboration between ophthalmology and optometry, in terms of interprofessional trust and communication.

“It’s very complicated”: a qualitative study of medicines management in intermediate care facilities in Northern Ireland

Background: Intermediate care (IC) describes a range of services targeted at older people, aimed at preventing unnecessary hospitalisation, promoting faster recovery from illness and maximising independence. Older people are at increased risk of medication-related adverse events, but little is known about the provision of medicines management services in IC facilities. This study aimed to describe the current provision of medicines management services in IC facilities in Northern Ireland (NI) and to explore healthcare workers' (HCWs) and patients' views of, and attitudes towards these services and the IC concept. 

Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted, recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a constant comparative approach with HCWs and patients from IC facilities in NI. 

Results: Interviews were conducted with 25 HCWs and 18 patients from 12 IC facilities in NI. Three themes were identified: 'concept and reality', 'setting and supply' and 'responsibility and review'. A mismatch between the concept of IC and the reality was evident. The IC facility setting dictated prescribing responsibilities and the supply of medicines, presenting challenges for HCWs. A lack of a standardised approach to responsibility for the provision of medicines management services including clinical review was identified. Whilst pharmacists were not considered part of the multidisciplinary team, most HCWs recognised a need for their input. Medicines management was not a concern for the majority of IC patients. 

Conclusions: Medicines management services are not integral to IC and medicine-related challenges are frequently encountered. Integration of pharmacists into the multidisciplinary team could potentially improve medicines management in IC.

A qualitative study of community pharmacists’ awareness of and involvement with intermediate care facilities

Rationale, aims and objectives: Intermediate care (IC) describes a range of services targeted at older people, aimed at preventing unnecessary hospitalisation, promoting faster recovery and maximising independence. The introduction of IC has created a new interface between primary and secondary care. Older people are known to be at an increased risk of medication-related problems when transferring between healthcare settings and pharmacists are often not included as part of IC multidisciplinary teams. This study aimed to explore community pharmacists’ (CPs) awareness of IC services and to investigate their views of and attitudes towards the medicines management aspects of such services, including the transfer of medication information.

Method: Semi-structured interviews were conducted, recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a constant comparative approach with CPs practising in the vicinity of IC facilities in Northern Ireland, UK.

Results: Interviews were conducted with 16 CPs. Three themes were identified and named ‘left out of the loop’, ‘chasing things up’ and ‘closing the loop’. CPs felt that they were often ‘left out of the loop’ with regards to both their involvement with local IC services and communication across the healthcare interfaces. As a result, CPs resorted to ‘chasing things up’ as they had to proactively try to obtain information relating to patients’ medications. CPs viewed themselves as ideally placed to facilitate medicines management across the healthcare interfaces (i.e., ‘closing the loop’), but several barriers to potential services were identified.

Conclusion: CPs have limited involvement with IC services. There is a need for improvement of effective communication of patients’ medication information between secondary care, IC and community pharmacy. Increasing CP involvement may contribute to improving continuity of care across such healthcare interfaces, thereby increasing the person-centeredness of service provision.

Patience, Persistence and Pragmatism: Experiences and Lessons Learnt from the Implementation of Clinically Integrated Teaching and Learning of Evidence-Based Health Care - A Qualitative Study

Background

Clinically integrated teaching and learning are regarded as the best options for improving evidence-based healthcare (EBHC) knowledge, skills and attitudes. To inform implementation of such strategies, we assessed experiences and opinions on lessons learnt of those involved in such programmes.

Methods and Findings

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 24 EBHC programme coordinators from around the world, selected through purposive sampling. Following data transcription, a multidisciplinary group of investigators carried out analysis and data interpretation, using thematic content analysis. Successful implementation of clinically integrated teaching and learning of EBHC takes much time. Student learning needs to start in pre-clinical years with consolidation, application and assessment following in clinical years. Learning is supported through partnerships between various types of staff including the core EBHC team, clinical lecturers and clinicians working in the clinical setting. While full integration of EBHC learning into all clinical rotations is considered necessary, this was not always achieved. Critical success factors were pragmatism and readiness to use opportunities for engagement and including EBHC learning in the curriculum; patience; and a critical mass of the right teachers who have EBHC knowledge and skills and are confident in facilitating learning. Role modelling of EBHC within the clinical setting emerged as an important facilitator. The institutional context exerts an important influence; with faculty buy-in, endorsement by institutional leaders, and an EBHC-friendly culture, together with a supportive community of practice, all acting as key enablers. The most common challenges identified were lack of teaching time within the clinical curriculum, misconceptions about EBHC, resistance of staff, lack of confidence of tutors, lack of time, and negative role modelling.

Conclusions

Implementing clinically integrated EBHC curricula requires institutional support, a critical mass of the right teachers and role models in the clinical setting combined with patience, persistence and pragmatism on the part of teachers.

Defining the content and delivery of an intervention to Change AdhereNce to treatment in BonchiEctasis (CAN-BE): a qualitative approach incorporating the Theoretical Domains Framework, behavioural change techniques and stakeholder expert panels

Background
Low patient adherence to treatment is associated with poorer health outcomes in bronchiectasis. We sought to use the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) (a framework derived from 33 psychological theories) and behavioural change techniques (BCTs) to define the content of an intervention to change patients’ adherence in bronchiectasis (Stage 1 and 2) and stakeholder expert panels to define its delivery (Stage 3).

Methods
We conducted semi-structured interviews with patients with bronchiectasis about barriers and motivators to adherence to treatment and focus groups or interviews with bronchiectasis healthcare professionals (HCPs) about their ability to change patients’ adherence to treatment. We coded these data to the 12 domain TDF to identify relevant domains for patients and HCPs (Stage 1). Three researchers independently mapped relevant domains for patients and HCPs to a list of 35 BCTs to identify two lists (patient and HCP) of potential BCTs for inclusion (Stage 2). We presented these lists to three expert panels (two with patients and one with HCPs/academics from across the UK). We asked panels who the intervention should target, who should deliver it, at what intensity, in what format and setting, and using which outcome measures (Stage 3).

Results
Eight TDF domains were perceived to influence patients’ and HCPs’ behaviours: Knowledge, Skills, Beliefs about capability, Beliefs about consequences, Motivation, Social influences, Behavioural regulation and Nature of behaviours (Stage 1). Twelve BCTs common to patients and HCPs were included in the intervention: Monitoring, Self-monitoring, Feedback, Action planning, Problem solving, Persuasive communication, Goal/target specified:behaviour/outcome, Information regarding behaviour/outcome, Role play, Social support and Cognitive restructuring (Stage 2). Participants thought that an individualised combination of these BCTs should be delivered to all patients, by a member of staff, over several one-to-one and/or group visits in secondary care. Efficacy should be measured using pulmonary exacerbations, hospital admissions and quality of life (Stage 3).

Conclusions
Twelve BCTs form the intervention content. An individualised selection from these 12 BCTs will be delivered to all patients over several face-to-face visits in secondary care. Future research should focus on developing physical materials to aid delivery of the intervention prior to feasibility and pilot testing. If effective, this intervention may improve adherence and health outcomes for those with bronchiectasis in the future.