Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34117014›Full record

ArticleBJGP open2021

Community end-of-life care during the COVID-19 pandemic: findings of a UK primary care survey.

Sarah Mitchell, Phillip Oliver, Clare Gardiner, Helen Chapman, Dena Khan, Kirsty Boyd, Jeremy Dale, Stephen Barclay, Catriona R Mayland

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJGP open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
9.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Reforming primary palliative care: a call to arms.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Free-text analysis of general practice out-of-hours (GPOOH) use by people with advanced cancer: an analysis of coded and uncoded free-text data.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023
    Article
  20. Article
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

9 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Sarah MitchellYorkshire Cancer Research Senior Research Fellow, Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK s.j.mitchell@sheffield.ac.uk.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1477-7860
Phillip OliverClinical Lecturer, Academic Unit of Medical Education, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Clare GardinerSenior Research Fellow, Division of Nursing and Midwifery, Health Sciences School, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Helen ChapmanQueen's Nurse and Head of Integrated Community Care, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
Dena KhanPatient and Public Involvement Representative, University of Warwick, Warwick, UK.
Kirsty BoydReader in Palliative Care, Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Jeremy DaleProfessor of Primary Care, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Stephen BarclaySenior Lecturer in General Practice and Palliative Care, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Catriona R MaylandYorkshire Cancer Research Senior Research Fellow, Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
University of Sheffield · GBUniversity of Warwick · GBYorkshire Cancer Research · GBCommunity Care · USUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Edinburgh · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThousands of people in the UK have required end-of-life care in the community during the COVID-19 pandemic. Primary healthcare teams (general practice and community nursing services) have provided the majority of this care, alongside specialist colleagues. There is a need to learn from this experience in order to inform future service delivery and planning.

aimTo understand the views of GPs and community nurses providing end-of-life care during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN &

settingA web-based, UK-wide questionnaire survey circulated via professional general practice and community nursing networks, during September and October 2020.

methodResponses were analysed using descriptive statistics and an inductive thematic analysis.

resultsValid responses were received from 559 individuals (387 community nurses, 156 GPs, and 16 unspecified roles), from all regions of the UK. The majority reported increased involvement in providing community end-of-life care. Contrasting and potentially conflicting roles emerged between GPs and community nurses. There was increased use of remote consultations, particularly by GPs. Community nurses took greater responsibility in most aspects of end-of-life care practice, particularly face-to-face care, but reported feeling isolated. For some GPs and community nurses, there has been considerable emotional distress.

conclusionPrimary healthcare services are playing a critical role in meeting increased need for end-of-life care in the community during the COVID-19 pandemic. They have adapted rapidly, but the significant emotional impact, especially for community nurses, needs addressing alongside rebuilding trusting and supportive team dynamics.

Indexed as

COVID-19district nursingend-of-life caregeneral practicepalliative careprimary health care

Identifiers

PMID34117014
PMCPMC8450890
OpenAlexW3168486763

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.