BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Inpatient palliative care (IPC) consults are associated with improved quality of care and less intensive utilization. However, little is known about how the needs of patients with advanced illness and the needs of their families and caregivers evolve or how effectively those needs are addressed. The objectives of this study were 1) to summarize findings in the literature about the needs of patients with advanced illness and the needs of their families and caregivers; 2) to identify the primary needs of patients, families, and caregivers across the continuum of care from their vantage point; and 3) to learn how IPC teams affect the care experience. METHODS: We used a longitudinal, video-ethnographic approach to observe and to interview 12 patients and their families before, during, and after an IPC consult at 3 urban medical centers. Additional interviews took place up to 12 months after discharge. RESULTS: Five patient/family/caregiver needs were important to all family units. IPC teams responded effectively to a variety of needs that were not met in the hospital, but some postdischarge needs, beyond the scope of IPC or health care coverage, were not completely met. CONCLUSION: Findings built upon the needs identified in the literature. The longitudinal approach highlighted changes in needs of patients, families, and caregivers in response to emerging medical and nonmedical developments, from their perspective. Areas for improvement include clear, integrated communications in the hospital and coordinated, comprehensive postdischarge support for patients not under hospice care and for their caregivers.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Inpatient palliative care (IPC) consults are associated with improved quality of care and less intensive utilization. However, little is known about how the needs of patients with advanced illness and the needs of their families and caregivers evolve or how effectively those needs are addressed. The objectives of this study were 1) to summarize findings in the literature about the needs of patients with advanced illness and the needs of their families and caregivers; 2) to identify the primary needs of patients, families, and caregivers across the continuum of care from their vantage point; and 3) to learn how IPC teams affect the care experience. METHODS: We used a longitudinal, video-ethnographic approach to observe and to interview 12 patients and their families before, during, and after an IPC consult at 3 urban medical centers. Additional interviews took place up to 12 months after discharge. RESULTS: Five patient/family/caregiver needs were important to all family units. IPC teams responded effectively to a variety of needs that were not met in the hospital, but some postdischarge needs, beyond the scope of IPC or health care coverage, were not completely met. CONCLUSION: Findings built upon the needs identified in the literature. The longitudinal approach highlighted changes in needs of patients, families, and caregivers in response to emerging medical and nonmedical developments, from their perspective. Areas for improvement include clear, integrated communications in the hospital and coordinated, comprehensive postdischarge support for patients not under hospice care and for their caregivers.
Authors: T Morita; T Akechi; M Ikenaga; Y Kizawa; H Kohara; T Mukaiyama; T Nakaho; N Nakashima; Y Shima; T Matsubara; M Fujimori; Y Uchitomi Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Mary D Naylor; Dorothy A Brooten; Roberta L Campbell; Greg Maislin; Kathleen M McCauley; J Sanford Schwartz Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: David Casarett; Amy Pickard; F Amos Bailey; Christine Ritchie; Christian Furman; Ken Rosenfeld; Scott Shreve; Zhen Chen; Judy A Shea Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2008-01-16 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Glenn Gade; Ingrid Venohr; Douglas Conner; Kathleen McGrady; Jeffrey Beane; Robert H Richardson; Marilyn P Williams; Marcia Liberson; Mark Blum; Richard Della Penna Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Richard Della Penna; Helene Martel; Esther B Neuwirth; Jennifer Rice; Marta I Filipski; Jennifer Green; Jim Bellows Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2009-12-29 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Maria Friedrichsen; Yvonne Hajradinovic; Maria Jakobsson; Per Milberg; Anna Milberg Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2016-09-16 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Laura Llop-Medina; Yu Fu; Jorge Garcés-Ferrer; Ascensión Doñate-Martínez Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-03-08 Impact factor: 3.390