Physician home visits to rostered patients during their last year of life: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Physician home visits are associated with better health outcomes, yet most patients near the end of life never receive such a visit. Our objectives were to describe the receipt of physician home visits during the last year of life after a referral to home care - an indication that the patient can no longer live independently - and to measure associations between patient characteristics and receipt of a home visit. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using linked population-based health administrative databases housed at ICES. We identified adult (aged ≥ 18 yr) decedents in Ontario who died between Mar. 31, 2013, and Mar. 31, 2018, who were receiving primary care and were referred to publicly funded home care services. We described the provision of physician home visits, office visits and telephone management. We used multinomial logistic regression to calculate the odds of receiving home visits from a rostered primary care physician, controlling for referral during the last year of life, age, sex, income quintile, rurality, recent immigrant status, referral by rostered physician, referral during hospital stay, number of chronic conditions and disease trajectory based on the cause of death. RESULTS: Of the 58 753 decedents referred in their last year of life, 3125 (5.3%) received a home visit from their family physician. Patient characteristics associated with higher odds of receiving home visits compared to office-based or telephone-based care were being female (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21-1.35), being 85 years of age or older (adjusted OR 2.42, 95% CI 1.80-3.26) and living in a rural area (adjusted OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.00-1.18). Increased odds were associated with home care referrals by the patient's primary care physician (adjusted OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.39-1.58) and referrals occurring during a hospital stay (adjusted OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.13-1.28). INTERPRETATION: A small proportion of patients near the end of life received home-based physician care, and patient characteristics did not explain the low visit rates. Future work on system- and provider-level factors may be critical to improve access to home-based end-of-life primary care.

Describing settings of care in the last 100 days of life for cancer decedents: a population-based descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have described the settings cancer decedents spend their end-of-life stage, with none considering homecare specifically. We describe the different settings of care experienced in the last 100 days of life by individuals with cancer and how settings of care change as they approached death. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study from January 2013 to December 2017, of decedents whose primary cause of death was cancer, using linked population-level health administrative datasets in Ontario, Canada. RESULTS: Decedents 125,755 were included in our cohort. The average age at death was 73, 46% were female, and 14% resided in rural regions. And 24% died of lung cancer, 7% breast, 7% colorectal, 7% pancreatic, 5% prostate, and 50% other cancers. In the last 100 days of life, decedents spent 25.9 days in institutions, 25.8 days receiving care in the community, and 48.3 days at home without any care. Individuals who died of lung and pancreatic cancers spent the most days at home without any care (52.1 and 52.6 days), while individuals who died of prostate and breast cancer spent the least days at home without any care (41.6 and 45.1 days). Regardless of cancer type, decedents spent fewer days at home and more days in institutions as they approached death, despite established patient preferences for an end-of-life experience at home. CONCLUSIONS: In the last 100 days of life, cancer decedents spent most of their time in either institutions or at home without any care. Improving homecare services during the end-of-life may provide people dying of cancer with a preferred dying experience.

Continuity of physician care over the last year of life for different cause-of-death categories: a retrospective population-based study.

BACKGROUND: The mix of care provided by family physicians, specialists and palliative care physicians can vary by the illnesses leading to death, which may result in disruptions of continuity of care at the end of life. We measured continuity of outpatient physician care in the last year of life across differing causes of death and assessed factors associated with higher continuity. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective descriptive study of adults who died in Ontario between 2013 and 2018, using linked provincial health administrative data. We calculated 3 measures of continuity (usual provider, Bice-Boxerman and sequential continuity), which range from 0 to 1, from outpatient physician visits over the last year of life for terminal illness, organ failure, frailty, sudden death and other causes of death. We used multivariable logistic regression models to evaluate associations between characteristics and a continuity score of 0.5 or greater. RESULTS: Among the 417 628 decedents, we found that mean usual provider, Bice-Boxerman and sequential continuity indices were 0.37, 0.30 and 0.37, respectively, with continuity being the lowest for those with terminal illness (0.27, 0.23 and 0.33, respectively). Higher number of comorbidities, higher neighbourhood income quintile and all non-sudden death categories were associated with lower continuity. INTERPRETATION: We found that continuity of physician care in the last year of life was low, especially in those with cancer. Further research is needed to validate measures of continuity against end-of-life health care outcomes.

Inpatient Palliative Care Is Associated with the Receipt of Palliative Care in the Community after Hospital Discharge: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Background: For hospitalized patients with palliative care needs, there is little evidence on whether postdischarge outcomes differ if inpatient palliative care was delivered by a palliative care specialist or nonspecialist/generalist. Objective: To evaluate relationships between inpatient palliative care involvement and physician-delivered palliative care in the community after hospital discharge among individuals with limited life expectancy. Design: Population-based retrospective cohort study using administrative health data. Settings/Subjects: Adults with a predicted median survival of six months or less admitted to acute care hospitals in Ontario, Canada, between April 1, 2013, and March 31, 2017, and discharged to the community. Measurements: Inpatient palliative care involvement was classified as high (e.g., palliative care unit), medium (e.g., palliative care specialist consult), low (e.g., generalist-delivered palliative care), or none. Community palliative care included outpatient and home and clinic visits three weeks postdischarge. Results: Among 3660 hospitalized adults, 82 (2.2%) received inpatient palliative care with high level of involvement, 462 (12.6%) with medium level of involvement, 525 (14.3%) with low level of involvement, and 2591 (70.8%) had no inpatient palliative care. Patients who received inpatient palliative care were more likely to receive community palliative care after discharge than those who received no inpatient palliative care. These associations were stronger among patients who received high/medium palliative care involvement than patients who received low palliative care involvement. Conclusions: Inpatient palliative care, including that delivered by generalists, is associated with an increased likelihood of community palliative care after discharge. Increased inpatient generalist palliative care may help support patients' palliative care needs.

Randomised trial of a serious illness decision aid (Plan Well Guide) for patients and their substitute decision-makers to improve engagement in advance care planning.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of a serious illness decision aid (Plan Well Guide) in increasing the engagement of substitute decision-makers (SDM) in advance care planning (ACP). METHODS: This trial was conducted (2017-2019) in outpatient settings in Ontario, Canada, aiming to recruit 90 dyads of patients aged 65 years and older at high risk of needing future medical decisions and their SDM. Participants were randomised to receive the intervention immediately or to a 3-month wait period. The Plan Well Guide was administered to the patient and SDM by a facilitator. Outcomes were change on the validated 17-item SDM ACP Engagement Survey (primary) and 15-item patient ACP Engagement Survey (secondary). RESULTS: Of 136 dyads approached, 58 consented and were randomised and 45 completed the study (28 immediate intervention, 17 delayed intervention). The trial was stopped early because of difficulties with enrolling and following up participants. The mean changes on the SDM ACP Engagement Survey and the patient ACP Engagement Survey favoured the first group but were not statistically significant (mean difference (MD)=+0.2 (95% CI: -0.3 to 0.6) and MD=+0.4 (95% CI: -0.1 to 0.8), respectively). In a post-hoc subgroup analysis, significant treatment effects were seen in SDMs with a lower-than-median baseline score compared with those at or above the median. CONCLUSIONS: In this statistically underpowered randomised trial, differences in SDM ACP engagement between groups were small. Further information is needed to overcome recruitment challenges and to identify people most likely to benefit from the Plan Well Guide.Trial registration number NCT03239639.

Assessing the application of continuity of care indices in the last year of life: a retrospective population-based study.

Context: Most people spend the majority of their last year of life at home or in a home-like setting, receiving outpatient healthcare. Increasing numbers of physicians and teams, including palliative care providers, may become involved in care in addition to a usual provider such as a family physician. Continuity of care (CoC) near the end of life, although considered a marker of quality of care, may be interrupted despite the provision of high-quality care. Objective: To describe continuity of outpatient physician care in the last 12 months of life and determine patient and illness-related factors associated with high continuity. Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Datasets: Linked population-based health administrative databases for Ontario, Canada, held at ICES. Population: Decedents aged 19 years or older, who died between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2017. Outcome Measures: Continuity of care scores for the last 12 months of life, using the Usual Provider continuity (UPC), Bice-Boxerman continuity (CoC), and Sequential Continuity (SECON) indices. Multivariate models were used to determine factors associated with higher continuity scores (>= 0.75). Results: Decedents (n=322,445) were on average 76.3 years of age, 47.8% were female, and 13.2% resided in rural regions. Decedents had a mean of 16.2 outpatient physician encounters in the last year of life, from a mean of 3.8 different physician specialties. Mean continuity indices' scores (1 being perfect) were low: UPC= 0.36, CoC= 0.31, and SECON= 0.37. Proportions of decedents with high continuity were: UPC= 12.6%, CoC= 9.6%, and SECON= 12.9%. Decedents who experienced a terminal illness (i.e., cancer) end-of-life trajectory were least likely to experience high UPC (OR= 0.32; 95% CI= 0.30, 0.34). Having six or more comorbidities (OR= 0.65; 95% CI= 0.63, 0.66), and being in the highest quintile of outpatient physician encounters (i.e., >22 visits) (OR= 0.28; 95% CI= 0.27, 0.29) were also negatively associated with high UPC. Results were similar for other indices. Conclusions: Decedents experience low continuity of outpatient physician care in the last year of life, especially those with cancer, comorbidities, and frequent physician visits. Modifications to existing indices may be needed to serve as end-of-life care quality indicators.

Advance care planning conversations in primary care: a quality improvement project using the Serious Illness Care Program.

BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) conversations are associated with improved end-of-life healthcare outcomes and patients want to engage in ACP with their healthcare providers. Despite this, ACP conversations rarely occur in primary care settings. The objective of this study was to implement ACP through adapted Serious Illness Care Program (SICP) training sessions, and to understand primary care provider (PCP) perceptions of implementing ACP into practice. METHODS: We conducted a quality improvement project guided by the Normalization Process Theory (NPT), in an interprofessional academic family medicine group in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. NPT is an explanatory model that delineates the processes by which organizations implement and integrate new work. PCPs (physicians, family medicine residents, and allied health care providers), completed pre- and post-SICP self-assessments evaluating training effectiveness, a survey evaluating program implementability and sustainability, and semi-structured qualitative interviews to elaborate on barriers, facilitators, and suggestions for successful implementation. Descriptive statistics and pre-post differences (Wilcoxon Sign-Rank test) were used to analyze surveys and thematic analysis was used to analyze qualitative interviews. RESULTS: 30 PCPs participated in SICP training and completed self-assessments, 14 completed NoMAD surveys, and 7 were interviewed. There were reported improvements in ACP confidence and skills. NoMAD surveys reported mixed opinions towards ACP implementation, specifically concerning colleagues' abilities to conduct ACP and patients' abilities to participate in ACP. Physicians discussed busy clinical schedules, lack of patient preparedness, and continued discomfort or lack of confidence in having ACP conversations. Allied health professionals discussed difficulty sharing patient prognosis and identification of appropriate patients as barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Training in ACP conversations improved PCPs' individual perceived abilities, but discomfort and other barriers were identified. Future iterations will require a more systematic process to support the implementation of ACP into regular practice, in addition to addressing knowledge and skill gaps.

Intensity of outpatient physician care in the last year of life: a population-based retrospective descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: For many patients, health care needs increase toward the end of life, but little is known about the extent of outpatient physician care during that time. The objective of this study was to describe the volume and mix of outpatient physician care over the last 12 months of life among patients dying with different end-of-life trajectories. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective descriptive study involving adults (aged ≥ 18 yr) who died in Ontario between 2013 and 2017, using linked provincial health administrative databases. Decedents were grouped into 5 mutually exclusive end-of-life trajectories (terminal illness, organ failure, frailty, sudden death and other). Over the last 12 months and 3 months of life, we examined the number of physician encounters, the number of unique physician specialties involved per patient and specialty of physician, the number of unique physicians involved per patient, the 5 most frequent types of specialties involved and the number of encounters that took place in the home; these patterns were examined by trajectory. RESULTS: Decedents (n = 359 559) had a median age of 78 (interquartile range 66-86) years. The mean number of outpatient physician encounters over the last year of life was 16.8 (standard deviation [SD] 13.7), of which 9.0 (SD 9.2) encounters were with family physicians. The mean number of encounters ranged from 11.6 (SD 10.4) in the frailty trajectory to 24.2 (SD 15.0) in the terminal illness trajectory across 3.1 (SD 2.0) to 4.9 (SD 2.1) unique specialties, respectively. In the last 3 months of life, the mean number of physician encounters was 6.8 (SD 6.4); a mean of 4.1 (SD 5.4) of these were with family physicians. INTERPRETATION: Multiple physicians are involved in outpatient care in the last 12 months of life for all end-of-life trajectories, with family physicians as the predominant specialty. Those who plan health care models of the end of life should consider support for family physicians as coordinators of patient care.

Frequency of providing a palliative approach to care in family practice: a chart review and perceptions of healthcare practitioners in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Most patients nearing the end of life can benefit from a palliative approach in primary care. We currently do not know how to measure a palliative approach in family practice. The objective of this study was to describe the provision of a palliative approach and evaluate clinicians' perceptions of the results. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive study of deceased patients in an interprofessional team family practice. We integrated conceptual models of a palliative approach to create a chart review tool to capture a palliative approach in the last year of life and assessed a global rating of whether a palliative approach was provided. Clinicians completed a questionnaire before learning the results and after, on perceptions of how often they believed a palliative approach was provided by the team. RESULTS: Among 79 patients (mean age at death 73 years, 54% female) cancer and cardiac diseases were the top conditions responsible for death. One-quarter of patients were assessed as having received a palliative approach. 53% of decedents had a documented discussion about goals of care, 41% had nurse involvement, and 15.2% had a discussion about caregiver well-being. These indicators had the greatest discrimination between a palliative approach or not. Agreement that elements of a palliative approach were provided decreased significantly on the clinician questionnaire from before to after viewing the results. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified measurable indicators of a palliative approach in family practice, that can be used as the basis for quality improvement.

A cross-sectional survey assessing the preparedness of the long-term care sector to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario, Canada.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic is a significant public health emergency that impacts all sectors of healthcare. The negative health outcomes for the COVID-19 infection have been most severe in the frail elderly dwelling in Canadian long-term care (LTC) homes. METHODS: An online cross-sectional survey of Ontario LTC Clinicians working in LTC homes in Ontario Canada was conducted to provide the clinician perspective on the preparedness and engagement of the LTC sector during the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey questionnaire was developed in collaboration with the Ontario Long-Term Care Clinicians organization (OLTCC) and was distributed between March 30, 2020 to May 25, 2020. All registered members of the OLTCC and Nurse-led LTC Outreach Teams were invited to participate. The primary outcomes were: 1) the descriptive report of the screening measures implemented, communication and information received, and the preparation of the respondent's LTC home to a potential COVID-19 outbreak; and 2) the level of agreement, as reported using a five-point Likert scale), to COVID-19 preparedness statements for the respondent's LTC home was also assessed. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 54% (160/294). LTC homes implemented a wide range of important interventions (e.g. instituting established respiratory isolation protocols, active screening of new LTC admissions, increasing education on infection control processes, encouraging sick staff to take time off, etc). Ample communications pertinent to the pandemic were received from provincial LTC organizations, the government and public health officials. However, the feasibility of implementing public health recommendations, as well as the engagement of the LTC sector in pandemic planning were identified as areas of concern. Medical director status was associated with an increased knowledge of local implementation of interventions to mitigate COVID-19, as well as endorsing increased access to reliable COVID-19 information and resources to manage a potential COVID-19 outbreak in their LTC home. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the communication and implementation of recommendations in the Ontario LTC sector, despite some concerns regarding feasibility. Importantly, LTC clinician respondents clearly indicated that better engagement with LTC leaders is needed to plan a coordinated pandemic response.