Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36944473›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2023

How can the priorities of older, frail patients and their carers be used to inform policy and practice at the end of life? Insights from qualitative research across multiple settings.

Rhiannon Jane Barker, Patricia Wilson, Claire Butler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Rhiannon Jane BarkerPHES, LSHTM, London, UK rhiannon.barker@lshtm.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-7854-6810
Patricia WilsonCentre for Health Services Studies, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK.
Claire ButlerCentre for Health Services Studies, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe paper reports on experiences from older patients and their carers of current provision of end-of-life care in England. It draws on data from a study that sought to explore the extent to which national policy for end-of-life care in England was aligned with the aspirations of stakeholders. Specifically, the study explored the balance between clinical healthcare vs social and relational care asking how this was aligned to patient priorities at this time of life. Here, we examine the extent to which the patient voice is attended to when health and social care services are delivered to older people and consider how the experiences of patients and carers could be used to improve outcomes.

designThe work draws on data collected as part of a realist informed study using a case study approach to gather data.

settingClinical Commissioning Groups were used as the boundaries of the three case studies and within these geographical areas data was collected in hospitals, care homes, hospices and patient homes.

participantsThis paper reports on in-depth interviews conducted with 21 patients at the end of life and 22 relatives/carers (n=43).

resultsWhile the medical care patients received was generally praised, it was reported that relational care, particularly in respect to adult social care received at home, was fragmented and of varying quality. Relational and social support were key to the patient and carer experience yet appeared to be hard to access.

conclusionThe work highlights the misalignment between the availability of different types of care at the end of life and patient priorities. More attention should be paid to the voice of older patients and their carers, drawing on their experiences to influence the way policy is translated into practice.

Indexed as

CaregiversTerminal CareAdultAgedDeathFrail ElderlyHumansQualitative ResearchHealth policyPALLIATIVE CAREQUALITATIVE RESEARCHQuality in health care

Identifiers

PMID36944473
PMCPMC10032383

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.