RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Understanding and addressing challenges for Advance Care Planning in the COVID-19 pandemic: An analysis of the UK CovPall survey data from specialist palliative care services
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.10.28.20200725
DO 10.1101/2020.10.28.20200725
A1 Bradshaw, A
A1 Dunleavy, L.
A1 Walshe, C.
A1 Preston, N.
A1 Cripps, R.
A1 Hocaoglu, M.B.
A1 Bajwah, S.
A1 Maddocks, M.
A1 Oluyase, A.
A1 Sleeman, K.E.
A1 Higginson, I.J.
A1 Fraser, L.K.
A1 Murtagh, F.E.M
A1 ,
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/10/30/2020.10.28.20200725.abstract
AB Background During the COVID-19 pandemic, specialist palliative care services have an important role to play conducting high-quality and individualised Advance Care Planning discussions. Little is known about the challenges to Advance Care Planning in this context, or the changes services have made in adapting to them.Aim To describe the challenges experienced, and changes made to support, Advance Care Planning at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.Design Cross-sectional on-line survey of UK palliative and hospice services’ response to COVID-19. Closed-ended responses are reported descriptively. Open-ended responses were analysed using a thematic Framework approach.Respondents 277 UK palliative and hospice care services.Results 37.9% of services provided more Advance Care Planning directly. 58.5% provided more support to others. Some challenges to Advance Care Planning pre-dated the pandemic, whilst other were COVID-19 specific or exacerbated by COVID-19. Six themes demonstrated challenges at different levels of the Social Ecological Model, including: complex decision making in the face of a new disease; maintaining a personalised approach; COVID-specific communication difficulties; workload and pressure; sharing information; and national context of fear and uncertainty. Two themes demonstrate changes made to support Advance Care Planning, including: adapting local processes and adapting local structures.Conclusions Professionals and healthcare providers need to ensure Advance Care Planning is individualised by tailoring it to the values, priorities, and ethnic, cultural, and religious context of each person. Policymakers need to consider carefully how high-quality, person-centred Advance Care Planning can be resourced as a part of standard healthcare ahead of future pandemic waves.What is already known about the topic?– An important part of palliative care’s response to COVID-19 is ensuring that Advance Care Planning discussions occur with patients and their care networks– High quality Advance Care Planning is viewed as a process that adopts a holistic, collaborative, and individualised approach– Prior to COVID-19, challenges to Advance Care Planning included time constraints, lack of training, fears of taking away hope, limited resources, and insufficient knowledgeWhat this paper adds?– The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated already-existing challenges to conducting high-quality, individualised Advance Care Planning, including the ability to maintain a personalised approach and sharing information between services– COVID-specific challenges to Advance Care Planning exist, including the complexities of decision-making for a novel disease, communication issues, and workload pressures– In responding to these challenges, services adapted local processes (prioritising specific components, normalisation and integration into everyday practice) and structures (using technology, shifting resources, collaboration) of careImplications for practice, theory or policy– COVID-19 has provided an opportunity to re-think Advance Care Planning in which the starting point to any discussion is always the values and priorities of patients themselves– Providers and policymakers need to urgently consider how high-quality Advance Care Planning can be resourced and normalised as a part of standard care across the health sector, ahead of future or recurrent pandemic waves and in routine care more generally– We provide questions for health professionals, services, and policy makers to consider in working towards thisCompeting Interest StatementDr. Bajwah, Dr Bradshaw, Dr Oluyase, Prof Preston, Ms Dunleavy, Prof Walshe, report grants from Medical Research Council [MR/V012908/1], during the conduct of the study Dr. Hocaoglu reports grants from Medical Research Council [MR/V012908/1], grants from National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration, South London, during the conduct of the study. Dr. Sleeman reports grants from Medical Research Council [MR/V012908/1], grants from National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration, South London, grants from National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Career Development Fellowship (CDF-2017-10-009), grants from NIHR Clinician Scientist Fellowship (CS-2015-15-005), grants from Cicely Saunders International, during the conduct of the study. Prof Higginson reports grants from Medical Research Council [MR/V012908/1], grants from National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)Applied Research Collaboration South London, grants from Cicely Saunders International, during the conduct of the study. Prof Fraser reports grants from Medical Research Council [MR/V012908/1], grants from NIHR Career Development Fellowship (CDF-2018-11-ST2-002) during the conduct of the study. Dr. Maddocks reports grants from Medical Research Council [MR/V012908/1], grants from National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)Applied Research Collaboration South London, grants from National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Career Development Fellowship (CDF-2017-10-009), during the conduct of the study; Ms Cripps reports grants from Medical Research Council [MR/V012908/1], grants from National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration, South London, grants from Cicely Saunders International, during the conduct of the study;. Prof Murtagh reports grants from Medical Research Council [MR/V012908/1], other from NIHR Senior Investigator, during the conduct of the studyClinical TrialISRCTN16561225Funding StatementThis research was supported by Medical Research Council grant number MR/V012908/1. Additional support was from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Applied Research Collaboration, South London, hosted at Kings College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, and Cicely Saunders International (Registered Charity No. 1087195). IJH is a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Emeritus Senior Investigator and is supported by the NIHR Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) South London (SL) at Kings College Hospital National Health Service Foundation Trust. IJH leads the Palliative and End of Life Care theme of the NIHR ARC SL and co-leads the national theme in this. MM is funded by a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Career Development Fellowship (CDF-2017-10-009) and NIHR ARC SL. LF is funded by a NIHR Career Development Fellowship (award CDF-2018-11-ST2-002). KS is funded by a NIHR Clinician Scientist Fellowship (CS-2015-15-005). RC is funded by Cicely Saunders International. FEM is a NIHR Senior Investigator. MBH is supported by the NIHR ARC SL. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR, or the Department of Health and Social Care. Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ethical approval was obtained from Kings College London Research Ethics committee (LRS-19/20-18541)All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesApplications for use of the survey data can be made for up to 10 years, and will be considered on a case by case basis on receipt of a methodologically sound proposal to achieve aims in line with the original protocol. The study protocol is available on request. All requests for data access should be addressed to the Chief Investigator via the details on the CovPall website (https://www.kcl.ac.uk/cicelysaunders/research/evaluating/covpall-study, and palliativecare{at}kcl.ac.uk) and will be reviewed by the Study Steering Group.