Literature DB >> 28606028

An Investigation of Perspectives of Respite Admission Among People Living With Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and the Hospitals That Support Them.

Michiko Nakai1, Yugo Narita2,3, Hidekazu Tomimoto3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis is a progressive disease with rapid degeneration. Respite care is an essential service for improving the well-being of both patients with this disease and their family caregivers, but accessibility of respite services is limited. This study investigates perspectives on respite admission among people living with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and the hospitals supporting them.
METHOD: We conducted semistructured interviews among 3 patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and 12 family members, exploring demographic information and their awareness and experience of respite admission. We also interviewed 16 representatives from hospitals about awareness of and preparation for respite admission for patients with this disease, the role of regional networks for intractable diseases, and knowledge about communication support schemes.
RESULTS: We found significant differences in the revised Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale between patients who had and had not received respite admission. Qualitative analysis of the data indicated that respite admission was a contributory factor in continuing and stabilizing home care. Limited provision of social services and hospital care quality were barriers to respite admission.
CONCLUSION: Respite admission was essential to continued home care for patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Severe-stage patients were eligible for respite admission. Its accessibility, however, was limited, especially for patients living in rural areas. Supporting hospitals had limited capacity to respond to patients' needs. Individualized care and communication were internal barriers to respite admission.

Entities:  

Keywords:  amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS); family caregiver; ongoing home care; respite admission; service accessibility

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28606028      PMCID: PMC5932694          DOI: 10.1177/2150131917696940

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Prim Care Community Health        ISSN: 2150-1319


Introduction

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a progressive disease with rapid degeneration during which ALS patients and their family caregivers suffer physical, emotional, and financial strain.[1-6] They require a wide range of health, social, and palliative care services. One essential service is respite care, which improves the well-being of both patients with ALS and family caregivers.[7-9] There has been a “nanbyo care” system in Japan since 1972, in which patients who meet certain criteria and have specific intractable diseases are able to obtain some medical, social, and financial support.[10] Despite this, many unsolved issues remain around the provision of support for those with advanced intractable neurological diseases. These include managing respite admission. There are also considerable regional differences in service provision, because of a shortage of services and uneven distribution of medical and social resources.[11-13] People living with ALS often find it hard to access support services.[7,14,15] This study was designed to explore discrepancies between the views of ALS patients and hospitals providing support for them in Japan, particularly about respite admissions.

Materials and Methods

Participants

We explained the study aim to the Mie Prefecture ALS Association Secretariat, which facilitated access to potential participants. We mailed our questionnaire to members, and recruited ALS patients who provided written consent. We conducted semistructured interviews with 3 ALS patients and 12 key family members from September to November 2014. These were mostly by telephone,[16] although 1 participant chose a face-to-face interview. The interviews covered demographic details, health care utilization, awareness, and experience of respite admission, communication ability, and assessment of current ALS severity using the revised ALS Functional Rating Scale (ALSFRS-R). We also mailed questionnaires to the hospitals in the liaison council of Networking for Patients with Intractable Neurological Diseases in Mie Prefecture. After obtaining written consent, we conducted telephone interviews with hospital representatives between October 2014 and January 2015. These covered awareness and preparation for respite admission for patients with intractable neurological diseases, and roles in the regional network for intractable diseases. Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Mie University Hospital Ethics Committee for Clinical Research in September 2014 (approval number 2786, 2787).

Analysis

All statistical analyses used SPSS 20 and significance was based on a t test. Qualitative data were analyzed thematically. Transcripts were read to identify meaningful units, then quotations with similar meanings were categorized into subthemes and themes.

Results

Patients’ Demographic and Characteristics

In December 2014, a total of 144 ALS patients were registered with the prefectural government, 42 of whom participated in the prefectural ALS association. We interviewed 15 of these or their family members (response rate 35.7%). Table 1 shows the participants’ demographic characteristics. The patients’ mean age was 61.0 years, and 73% were male. The mean time from illness onset to interview was 71.9 months. The mean ALSFRS-R score was 16.2. We classified patients’ communication ability by clinical stage,[17] with 12 patients as stage I, 2 as stage III, and 1 as stage V.
Table 1.

Demographic Characteristics of Patients With Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis.

No.Key PersonRespondentPatient
SettingLocationDistance to Respite Hospital(km)Patient Service Use
Age (Years)SexDisease Duration (Months)ALSFRS-RRespirationRespite AdmissionCommunication
Care ManagementVisiting NurseVisiting RehabilitationGeneral PractitionerHome Care Worker
ToolStage[a]
1SpouseSpouse69F730TIVNoAACIHospitalNorth15NoNoNoNoNo
2SpouseSpouse47M1030TIVYesAACIHomeNorth37YesYesYesYesYes
3SpouseSpouse58M1508TIVYesAACIHomeMiddle65YesYesYesYesYes
4SpouseSpouse64M840TIVYesVHomeNorth19YesYesYesYesYes
5SpouseSpouse68M1130TIVYesAACIHomeSouth34YesYesYesYesYes
6ParentMother in law36M1040TIVNoAACICare facilityNorth9YesYesNoNoYes
7SpouseSpouse72M733NIVNoBody languageIIIHospitalSouth98NoNoNoNoNo
8SpouseSpouse65M5731Without supportNoVerbalIHomeNorth21YesYesNoNoNo
9SpouseSpouse89M12917Without supportArranged but not usedBody languageIIIHomeNorth15.5YesYesNoYesYes
10SpousePatient68M4020Without supportNoVerbalIHospitalNorth33NoNoNoNoNo
11SpouseSpouse68F1632Without supportNoVerbalIHomeCenter11.5YesYesYesNoNo
12SpouseFather46M2236Without supportNoVerbalIHomeCenter46NoNoYesNoNo
13SpousePatient53F2743Without supportNoVerbalIHomeCenter13YesYesYesNoNo
14SpousePatient60F3634Without supportNoVerbalIHomeNorth10NoNoYesNoNo
15SpouseSpouse58M5119Without supportYesVerbalIHomeCenter7YesYesNoNoNo

Abbreviations: F, female; M, male; ALSFRS-R, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale; TIV, tracheostomy with invasive ventilation; NIV, noninvasive ventilation; AAC, augmentative and alternative communication devices.

Communication stage: I—can communicate in sentences, II—can communicate with one-word answers only, III—can communicate with nonverbal yes/no responses only, IV—can only communicate occasionally because of uncertain yes/no responses, V—cannot communicate by any means.

Demographic Characteristics of Patients With Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis. Abbreviations: F, female; M, male; ALSFRS-R, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale; TIV, tracheostomy with invasive ventilation; NIV, noninvasive ventilation; AAC, augmentative and alternative communication devices. Communication stage: I—can communicate in sentences, II—can communicate with one-word answers only, III—can communicate with nonverbal yes/no responses only, IV—can only communicate occasionally because of uncertain yes/no responses, V—cannot communicate by any means. Eleven patients (73%) were in home care settings, 4 of whom had tracheostomy with invasive ventilation (TIV). All of them used home health care services. Among the participants in home care settings, one whose disease was at very early stage was not aware of respite admission. Five participants had undergone respite admission. Another had had respite care arranged but had refused because of the transfer cost. The distance to the respite hospitals was 7 to 65 km. The patient transfer costs were 10 000 to 30 000 yen. All of them were male with their spouses as caregivers. Within the group in home care settings, we compared the group that had arranged or received respite admission to the group that had not experienced it. The mean ALSFRS-R score was significantly lower (7.3 vs 35.2; P = .00) and the mean disease duration (months) was significantly longer (105 vs 31.6; P = .002) for the respite admission group. Three patients (20%) were in hospital, one of whom had TIV and another had noninvasive ventilation (NIV). One had TIV in a care facility.

Qualitative Data From People Living With ALS

Two main themes emerged from the interviews with patients and caregivers (Table 2).
Table 2.

Overview of Themes and Subthemes About Respite Admission From Patients With Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) and Hospitals.

ThemeSubtheme
Patients with ALS and their family
 Management to support ongoing home careEasing the care load
Conflict between the desire for a break from caregiving and the wish to maintain individualized care
 Attempting to prepare for the futureRecognition that the future is uncertain
Desire to secure resources to help them cope
Hospitals
 Hospitals’ significance in respite admissionTemporary substitute for family caregivers
Supporting ongoing home care
Providing medical care to maintain patient health
Assessment of patient condition and reconsideration of provision of home care
 Current issues and coordination at acute hospitalsLow priority for acute hospital
Differences between patients’ expectations and services available at hospital
Manpower constraints on providing individualized care for patients with ALS during respite admissions
Limited respite facility for patients with ALS at homeRecognized roles of chronic hospitals
Made effort to accept respite admissions
Concerns about who leads the care teamPatient views and decisions may change with time; it is difficult to share information among clinicians and external practitioners
Poor team approach among medical institutions
Lack of clarity about leadership of care team
Overview of Themes and Subthemes About Respite Admission From Patients With Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) and Hospitals.

Managing to Support Ongoing Home Care

There were some issues that influenced family caregiving, such as other family members’ requirements of care, caregivers’ age, health condition, and working status. Caregivers tended to maximize their use of support services to ease their care load. Caregivers often mentioned the care burden and desired for a break from caregiving. Caregivers perceived respite services as essential for maintaining home care. Individual care procedures including positioning and communication were established at each patient’s home, although such care may not be available in hospital. Participants who had undergone respite admission were dissatisfied with the quantity and quality of hospital care. A sense of guilt arose from conflict between the desire for a break from caregiving and the wish to maintain individualized care. Two patients with relatively early stage (ALSFRS-R: 43 and 34) expected to undergo respite admissions in the future, based on the disease prognosis and family care capacity. Two patients had abandoned home care services because their condition had worsened, and they abandoned home care.

Attempting to Prepare for the Future

People with ALS recognized uncertainty about the illness trajectory, acute deterioration, caregivers’ capacity, and unforeseen issues which influenced their future planning. Some had been kept waiting or refused respite admission to nearby hospitals. Through those experiences, people gained a sense that it was difficult to obtain a hospital bed. They wanted to secure resources to help them cope.

Hospital Characteristics

Sixteen hospitals out of 19 in the liaison council of Networking for Patients with Intractable Neurological Diseases in Mie Prefecture participated in this study (response rate 84.2%). Hospital representatives discussed the hospital’s roles in caring for patients with intractable neurological diseases. These included respite admission (13), providing a second opinion (12), managing acute complications of the illness (9), diagnosis (8), long-term admission (7), coordinating regional support (5), educational support (3), and as a trial (2). All hospitals recognized the significance of respite admission, although none regularly scheduled it. Six acute hospitals with full-time neurologists provided diagnosis, decision-making support, and services for acute complications. They occasionally provided respite admission, but had limited capacity. Three chronic hospitals with full-time neurologists provided respite admission and long-term admission. Four acute hospitals without a neurologist recognized a role in providing respite admission, but had seldom done so. Three chronic hospitals without a neurologist had long-term care wards although they could not manage patients receiving TIV.

Hospital Qualitative Data

Four themes emerged from the hospital interviews (Table 2).

Hospitals’ Significance in Respite Admission

Hospitals viewed respite admission as a temporary break for caregivers and a factor supporting ongoing home care. Respite admission might also be an opportunity to assess a patient’s condition and reconsider home care provision.

Current Issues and Coordination at Acute Hospitals

Acute hospitals prioritized acute care over community medicine and safety management. Hospital representatives commented, “It’s not easy to care simultaneously for acute patients and chronic patients with intractable diseases.” Some hospitals limited respite admissions to primary patients.

Limited Respite Bed for Patients With ALS

Two chronic hospitals showed actively accepted respite admissions. Respite requests from across the prefecture were therefore concentrated on those hospitals despite limited beds.

Concerns About Who Led the Care Team

Multiple health professionals were involved in caring for patients with ALS, and most tended to feel ambiguous about their roles within the team.

Discussion

This study found that severe-stage longer-term patients with ALS were generally able to access respite admission, although the sample size was small. People with ALS face uncertainty[1] and therefore try to manage it.[18] Respite admission is an important coping strategy to help manage and maintain ongoing home care but both quantitative and qualitative service provision was insufficient. All the hospitals in this study understood the significance of respite admission, although acute hospitals in particular found it difficult to provide individualized care for ALS patients. There was a mismatch between patient expectations and hospitals’ capacity, and acute hospitals limited respite admissions. A small number of chronic hospitals therefore accounted for the majority of such admissions. Distance to service resulted in high transfer costs, especially for patients in rural areas. In this study, quantitative data were analyzed using data about homecare settings. We used qualitative data from all participants, which covered difficulty of caregiving and service access at home. These may be equivalent to “abandoned home care.” Home care for patients with ALS often decreases as the disease progresses.[8,11,13,19-21] This results in a greater care burden[4,22] and affects patients’ future planning.[23,24] Respite admission is therefore important for severe-stage ALS patients. Patients and family caregivers expressed dissatisfaction with care during respite admissions. Caregivers were often afraid to discuss respite admission with patients.[18,21,25] In this study, 2 patients with early-stage disease expected to need respite admission. This suggests that early discussion about respite facilitate will future planning. Several professionals within hospitals and in the community are involved in managing care for ALS patients. These patients have a wide range of care needs and different ethical issues arise at different disease stages. Professionals mentioned problems working across organizations. Patients’ needs and decisions may change over time, and no professionals are prepared to assume overall long-term responsibility,[24] but gaps in information and communication among health professionals lead to disruption of services.[26] Coordination of cross-boundary working is necessary in ALS care to promote cooperation within the care team and stable care at home.
  20 in total

1.  Evaluation of the Neurodegenerative Conditions Coordinated Care Program (NCCCP) in Western Australia: barriers to better service provision.

Authors:  Susanne Bahn; Margaret Giles
Journal:  Eval Program Plann       Date:  2011-07-18

Review 2.  A Review: carers, MND and service provision.

Authors:  Carole Mockford; Crispin Jenkinson; Raymond Fitzpatrick
Journal:  Amyotroph Lateral Scler       Date:  2006-09

3.  Service use and needs of people with motor neurone disease and their carers in Scotland.

Authors:  E R van Teijlingen; E Friend; A D Kamal
Journal:  Health Soc Care Community       Date:  2001-11

4.  Predictors of impaired communication in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis patients with tracheostomy-invasive ventilation.

Authors:  Yuki Nakayama; Toshio Shimizu; Yoko Mochizuki; Kentaro Hayashi; Chiharu Matsuda; Masahiro Nagao; Kazuhiko Watabe; Akihiro Kawata; Kiyomitsu Oyanagi; Eiji Isozaki; Imaharu Nakano
Journal:  Amyotroph Lateral Scler Frontotemporal Degener       Date:  2015-06-29       Impact factor: 4.092

5.  Social services homecare for people with motor neurone disease/amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: why are such services used or refused?

Authors:  Mary R O'Brien; Bridget Whitehead; Philip N Murphy; J Douglas Mitchell; Barbara A Jack
Journal:  Palliat Med       Date:  2011-03-07       Impact factor: 4.762

6.  ALS: Family caregiver needs and quality of life.

Authors:  Mary Tederous Williams; James P Donnelly; Tomas Holmlund; Michael Battaglia
Journal:  Amyotroph Lateral Scler       Date:  2008-10

7.  Non-finite loss and emotional labour: family caregivers' experiences of living with motor neurone disease.

Authors:  Robin A Ray; Annette F Street
Journal:  J Clin Nurs       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 3.036

8.  Promoting continuity of care for people with long-term neurological conditions: the role of the neurology nurse specialist.

Authors:  Fiona Aspinal; Kate Gridley; Sylvia Bernard; Gillian Parker
Journal:  J Adv Nurs       Date:  2012-01-25       Impact factor: 3.187

9.  Engaging in patient decision-making in multidisciplinary care for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: the views of health professionals.

Authors:  Anne Hogden; David Greenfield; Peter Nugus; Matthew C Kiernan
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2012-09-27       Impact factor: 2.711

10.  What are the roles of carers in decision-making for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis multidisciplinary care?

Authors:  Anne Hogden; David Greenfield; Peter Nugus; Matthew C Kiernan
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2013-02-28       Impact factor: 2.711

View more
  1 in total

1.  Supportive needs of informal caregivers of people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis in Switzerland: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Christopher Poppe; Kathi Schweikert; Tanja Krones; Tenzin Wangmo
Journal:  Palliat Care Soc Pract       Date:  2022-02-28
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.