Mapping and characterising electronic palliative care coordination systems and their intended impact: A national survey of end-of-life care commissioners

Author:

Birtwistle Jacqueline,Millares-Martin Pablo,Evans Catherine J.,Foy Robbie,Relton Samuel,Richards Suzanne,Sleeman Katherine E.,Twiddy Maureen,Bennett Michael I.,Allsop Matthew J.ORCID

Abstract

Objectives In England, Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems (EPaCCS) were introduced in 2008 to support care coordination and delivery in accordance with patient preferences. Despite policy supporting their implementation, there has been a lack of rigorous evaluation of EPaCCS and it is not clear how they have been translated into practice. This study sought to examine the current national implementation of EPaCCS, including their intended impact on patient and service outcomes, and barriers and facilitators for implementation. Methods We conducted a national cross-sectional online survey of end-of-life care commissioning leads for Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) in England. We enquired about the current implementation status of EPaCCS, their role in information sharing and intended impact, and requested routine patient-level data relating to EPaCCS. Results Out of 135 CCGs, 85 (63.0%) responded, with 57 (67.1%) having operational EPaCCS. Use of EPaCCS were confined to healthcare providers with most systems (67%) not supporting information sharing with care homes and social care providers. Most systems (68%) sought to facilitate goal concordant care, although there was inconsonance between intended impacts and monitoring measures used. Common challenges to implementation included healthcare professionals’ limited engagement. Only one-third of patients had an EPaCCS record at death with limited recording of patient preferences. Conclusions Critical gaps exist in engagement with EPaCCS and their ability to facilitate information sharing across care providers. The limited alignment between stated goals of EPaCCS and their monitoring impedes efforts to understand which characteristics of systems can best support care delivery.

Funder

National Institute for Health and Care Research

Publisher

Public Library of Science (PLoS)

Subject

Multidisciplinary

Reference30 articles.

1. From universal health coverage to right care for health;S Kleinert;Lancet,2017

2. Is palliative care support associated with better quality end-of-life care indicators for patients with advanced cancer? A retrospective cohort study.;LE Ziegler;BMJ Open,2018

3. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of home palliative care services for adults with advanced illness and their caregivers.;B Gomes;Cochrane Database Syst Rev,2013

4. Utilizing the Electronic Health Record to Improve Advance Care Planning: A Systematic Review.;MT Huber;American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine®,2017

5. Legal and Ethical Issues Surrounding Advance Care Directives in Australia: Implications for the Advance Care Planning Document in the Australian My Health Record.;S McCarthy;J Law Med,2017

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3