Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33619205›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

Palliative and end-of-life care in care homes: protocol for codesigning and implementing an appropriate scalable model of Needs Rounds in the UK.

Aisha Macgregor, Alasdair Rutherford, Brendan McCormack, Jo Hockley, Margaret Ogden, Irene Soulsby, Maisie McKenzie, Karen Spilsbury, Barbara Hanratty, Liz Forbat

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Aisha MacgregorFaculty of Social Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5812-9323
Alasdair RutherfordFaculty of Social Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK.
Brendan McCormackDivisions of Nursing, Occupational Therapy & Arts Therapies, Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, UK.
Jo HockleyUsher Institute, College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Margaret OgdenFaculty of Social Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK.
Irene SoulsbyFaculty of Social Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK.
Maisie McKenzieFaculty of Social Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK.
Karen SpilsburySchool of Healthcare, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6908-0032
Barbara HanrattyPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Liz ForbatFaculty of Social Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK elizabeth.forbat1@stir.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-7218-5775

Funding

Department of Health NIHR128799
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPalliative and end-of-life care in care homes is often inadequate, despite high morbidity and mortality. Residents can experience uncontrolled symptoms, poor quality deaths and avoidable hospitalisations. Care home staff can feel unsupported to look after residents at the end of life. Approaches for improving end-of-life care are often education-focused, do not triage residents and rarely integrate clinical care. This study will adapt an evidence-based approach from Australia for the UK context called 'Palliative Care Needs Rounds' (Needs Rounds). Needs Rounds combine triaging, anticipatory person-centred planning, case-based education and case-conferencing; the Australian studies found that Needs Rounds reduce length of stay in hospital, and improve dying in preferred place of care, and symptoms at the end of life. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This implementation science study will codesign and implement a scalable UK model of Needs Rounds. The Integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework will be used to identify contextual barriers and use facilitation to enable successful implementation. Six palliative care teams, working with 4-6 care homes each, will engage in two phases. In phase 1 (February 2021), stakeholder interviews (n=40) will be used to develop a programme theory to meet the primary outcome of identifying what works, for whom in what circumstances for UK Needs Rounds. Subsequently a workshop to codesign UK Needs Rounds will be run. Phase 2 (July 2021) will implement the UK model for a year. Prospective data collection will focus on secondary outcomes regarding hospitalisations, residents' quality of death and care home staff capability of adopting a palliative approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Frenchay Research Ethics Committee (287447) approved the study. Findings will be disseminated to policy-makers, care home/palliative care practitioners, residents/relatives and academic audiences. An implementation package will be developed for practitioners to provide the tools and resources required to adopt UK Needs Rounds. REGISTRATION DETAILS: Registration details: ISRCTN15863801.

Indexed as

Palliative CareTerminal CareAgedAustraliaHomes for the AgedHumansNursing HomesProspective StudiesUnited Kingdomadult palliative caregeriatric medicinepalliative careprotocols & guidelines

Identifiers

PMID33619205
PMCPMC7903098

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.