Anticipatory prescribing in community end-of-life care: systematic review and narrative synthesis of the evidence since 2017.

BACKGROUND: The anticipatory prescribing of injectable medications is recommended practice in controlling distressing symptoms in the last days of life. A 2017 systematic review found practice and guidance was based on inadequate evidence. Since then, there has been considerable additional research, warranting a new review. AIM: To review the evidence published since 2017 concerning anticipatory prescribing of injectable medications for adults at the end-of-life in the community, to inform practice and guidance. DESIGN: Systematic review and narrative synthesis. METHODS: Nine literature databases were searched from May 2017 to March 2022, alongside reference, citation and journal hand-searches. Gough's Weight of Evidence framework was used to appraise included studies. RESULTS: Twenty-eight papers were included in the synthesis. Evidence published since 2017 shows that standardised prescribing of four medications for anticipated symptoms is commonplace in the UK; evidence of practices in other countries is limited. There is limited data on how often medications are administered in the community. Prescriptions are 'accepted' by family caregivers despite inadequate explanations and they generally appreciate having access to medications. Robust evidence of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of anticipatory prescribing remains absent. CONCLUSION: The evidence underpinning anticipatory prescribing practice and policy remains based primarily on healthcare professionals' perceptions that the intervention is reassuring, provides effective, timely symptom relief in the community and prevents crisis hospital admissions. There is still inadequate evidence regarding optimal medications and dose ranges, and the effectiveness of these prescriptions. Patient and family caregiver experiences of anticipatory prescriptions warrant urgent investigation. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42016052108.

Community-based anticipatory prescribing during COVID-19: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: To understand healthcare professionals' experiences of delivering anticipatory prescribing (AP) during the first wave of the UK COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 16 healthcare professionals involved in community palliative care. Data were analysed inductively using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Some of practitioners' fears about the pandemic's impact on delivering AP had not been realised during the first wave. Among patients with COVID-19 for whom community end-of-life care was deemed appropriate, deaths were perceived to be relatively easy to palliate with standard medications. These deaths were typically too rapid for AP to be appropriate or feasible. For non-COVID deaths, providing timely AP was more challenging: although community nurses and some palliative specialists continued to visit patients regularly, general practitioners did many fewer visits, moving abruptly to mainly remote consultations. This left some community nurses feeling undersupported, and prompted some palliative specialists to increase their direct involvement in AP. Several other changes were widely welcomed: collaboration to maintain drug supplies, adoption of online meetings and paperless practice, enhanced specialist helplines and a new policy allowing reuse of medication in care homes. The inclusion of more non-injectable options in AP protocols allowed clinicians to offer selected patients more choice, but few had yet done this in practice. No participants reported changing their prepandemic practice regarding administration of AP by lay caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: Accomplishing AP during a pandemic was challenging, requiring healthcare professionals to make rapid changes to their systems and practices. Some changes may produce lasting improvements.