Understanding end-of-life care in Australian hospitals.

ObjectiveTo explore end-of-life care in the ward and intensive care unit (ICU) environment in nine Australian hospitals in a retrospective observational study.MethodsIn total, 1693 in-hospital deaths, 356 in ICU, were reviewed, including patient demographics, advance care plans, life-sustaining treatments, recognition of dying by clinicians and evidence of the palliative approach to patient care.ResultsMost patients (n=1430, 84%) were aged ≥60 years, with a low percentage (n=208, 12%) having an end-of-life care plan on admission. Following admission, 82% (n=1391) of patients were recognised as dying, but the time between recognition of dying to death was short (ICU (staying 4-48h) median 0.34 days (first quartile (Q1), third quartile (Q3): 0.16, 0.72); Ward (staying more than 48h) median 2.1 days (Q1, Q3: 0.96, 4.3)). Although 41% (n=621) patients were referred for specialist palliative care, most referrals were within the last few days of life (2.3 days (0.88, 5.9)) and 62% of patients (n=1047) experienced active intervention in their final 48h.ConclusionsLate recognition of dying can expose patients to active interventions and minimises timely palliative care. To attain alignment to the National Consensus Statement to improve experiences of end-of-life care, a nationally coordinated approach is needed.What is known about the topic?The majority of Australian patient deaths occur in hospitals whose care needs to align to the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care's National Consensus Statement, essential elements of safe and high-quality end-of-life care.What does this paper add?The largest Australian study of hospital deaths reveals only 12% of patients have existing advance care plans, recognition of death is predominantly within the last 48h of life, with 60% receiving investigations and interventions during this time with late symptom relief.What are the implications for practitioners?Given the poor alignment with the National Consensus Statement, a nationally coordinated approach would improve the patient experience of end-of-life care.

'Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT) improves renal nurses' confidence in recognising patients approaching end of life'.

BACKGROUND: Identification of people with deteriorating health is essential for quality patient-centred care and optimal management. The Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT) is a guide to identifying people with deteriorating health for care planning without incorporating a prognostic time frame. OBJECTIVES: To improve renal nursing staff confidence in identifying patients approaching end-of-life and advocate for appropriate multidisciplinary care planning. DESIGN: This pilot feasibility prospective cohort study conducted in the renal ward of a major metropolitan health service during 2019 included a preintervention/postintervention survey questionnaire. A programme of education was implemented training staff to recognise end-of-life and facilitate appropriate care planning. RESULTS: Several domains in the postintervention survey demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in renal nurses' perception of confidence in their ability to recognise end of life. Of the 210 patients admitted during the study period, 16% were recognised as SPICT positive triggering renal physicians to initiate discussions about end-of-life care planning with patients and their families and to document a plan. Six months poststudy, 72% of those patients recognised as SPICT positive had died with a documented plan of care in place. CONCLUSION: The use of SPICT for hospital admissions and the application of education in topics related to end-of-life care resulted in a significant improvement in nurses' confidence in recognising deteriorating and frail patients approaching their end of life. The use of this tool also increased the number of deteriorating patients approaching end of life with goals of care documented.

Nurses' perceptions and experiences of caring for patients who die in the emergency department setting.

INTRODUCTION: The number of people dying in emergency departments (EDs) is increasing. However, EDs are not well designed or resourced for safe and effective End-Of-Life (EOL) care encounters, and there is little evidence regarding clinicians' perceptions and experiences of providing such care when the death is sudden and unexpected. AIM: This study explored nurses' perceptions and experiences of caring for patients who die suddenly and unexpectedly in the ED. METHODS: Open-end responses were collected as part of a larger descriptive survey design. The qualitative data were analysed thematically. RESULTS: 211 ED nurse completed the online survey. Within the qualitative data, five themes were identified during analysis: 1) key elements of EOL care, 2) systemic and environmental barriers, 3) educational deficits, 4) role ambiguity, and 5) emotional impact. Participants identified communication, a standardised approach, and better educational preparedness as the most important elements of EOL care when the death was sudden and unexpected. CONCLUSIONS: ED nurses want to provide high quality care to dying patients and their families. However, their efforts are hampered by systemic and environmental barriers outside their control. There is a need for a culture shift to overcome the barriers that currently obstruct ED nurses from providing meaningful and effective EOL care in the ED.

Rules for the classification of younger children with nonverbal learning disabilities and basic phonological processing disabilities.

Rules for the classification of Nonverbal Learning Disabilities (NLD) and Basic Phonological Processing Disabilities (BPPD) that had been generated and tested on older children (ages 9-15) were applied to younger children (ages 7-8). The goal was to evaluate the applicability of these classification rules for a younger population with NLD and BPPD, and to make revisions if necessary. These rules were used to differentiate these two subtypes of learning disabilities using levels and patterns of performance on motor/psychomotor, tactile/perceptual, visual-spatial, auditory-perceptual, problem solving, and language measures. An experienced child-clinical neuropsychologist classified each child. Only those children who received a classification of NLD or BPPD by the neuropsychologist and those who met criteria for definite or probable NLD and BPPD as defined by the rules were used in this study. Revisions were made to these rules for younger children. Revised rules allow for their use as a source of information to assist a clinician in deciding whether a comprehensive neuropsychological evaluation would be valuable. They may also be useful for research purposes.