Comparing quality indicator rates for home care clients receiving palliative and end-of-life care before and during the Covid-19 pandemic

Author:

Kruizinga Julia,Fisher Kathryn,Guthrie Dawn,Northwood Melissa,Kaasalainen Sharon

Abstract

Abstract Background The consensus among Canadians with regards to end-of-life preferences is that with adequate support the majority prefer to live and die at home. Purpose To compare quality indicator (QI) rates for home care clients receiving palliative and end-of-life care prior to and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods A retrospective population-based cohort design was used. Sixteen QIs informed by existing literature and a preliminary set of QIs recently evaluated by a modified Delphi panel were compared. Data were obtained from the interRAI Palliative Care instrument for Ontario home care clients for two separate cohorts: the pre-COVID (January 14, 2019 to March 16, 2020) and COVID cohort (March 17, 2020 to May 18, 2021). A propensity score analysis was used to match (using nearest neighbour matching) on 21 covariates, resulting in a sample size of 2479 unique interRAI Palliative Care assessments in each cohort. Alternative propensity score methods were explored as part of a sensitivity analysis. Results After matching the pre-COVID and COVID cohorts, five of the 16 QIs had statistically significant differences in the QI rates (change from pre-COVID to COVID): decrease in prevalence of severe or excruciating daily pain (p = 0.03, effect size=-0.08), decrease in prevalence of caregiver distress (p = 0.02, effect size=-0.06), decrease in prevalence of negative mood (p = 0.003, effect size=- 0.17), decrease in prevalence of a delirium-like syndrome (p = 0.001, effect size=-0.25) and decrease in prevalence of nausea or vomiting (p = 0.04, effect size=-0.06). While the alternative propensity score methods produced slightly different results, no clinically meaningful differences were seen between the cohorts when effect sizes were examined. All methods were in agreement regarding the highest QI rates, which included the prevalence of shortness of breath with activity, no advance directives, and fatigue. Conclusion This study is the first to examine differences in QI rates for home care clients receiving palliative and end-of-life care before and during COVID in Ontario. It appears that QI rates did not change over the course of the pandemic in this population. Future work should be directed to understanding the temporal variation in these QI rates, risk-adjusting the QI rates for further comparison among jurisdictions, provinces, and countries, and in creating benchmarks for determining acceptable rates of different QIs.

Funder

Registered Nurses’ Foundation of Ontario

Canadian Nurses’ Foundation

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Reference56 articles.

1. Home Care Ontario. More Home Care For Me And You: Preparing Ontario’s Home Care System for the Challenges of Tomorrow [Internet], Hamilton ON. ; 2018 p. 1–18. Available from: https://www.homecareontario.ca/docs/default-source/position-papers/home-care-ontario-more-home-care-for-me-and-you-february-28-2018.pdf?sfvrsn = 16.

2. Griebeler Cordeiro FR, Oliveira S, Zeppini Giudice J, Pellegrini Fernandes V, Timm Oliveira A. Definitions for palliative care, end-of-life and terminally ill in oncology: a scoping review. Enfermería: Cuidados Humanizados. 2020;9(2):205–28.

3. Brazil K, McAiney C, Caron-O’Brien M, Kelley ML, O’Krafka P, Sturdy-Smith C. Quality End-of-Life Care in Long-Term Care facilities: Service Providers’ perspective. J Palliat Care. 2004;20(2):85–92.

4. Gomes B, Calanzani N, Gysels M, Hall S, Higginson IJ. Heterogeneity and changes in preferences for dying at home: a systematic review. BMC Palliat Care. 2013;12:7.

5. Gomes B, Calanzani N, Curiale V, McCrone P, Higginson IJ. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of home palliative care services for adults with advanced Illness and their caregivers. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;6. CD007760.

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