Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Forvie Site, Robinson Way, Cambridge CB2 0SR, UK.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2013 Mar 11;13:89. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-13-89.
Palliative care is a policy priority internationally. In England, policymakers are seeking to develop high quality care for all by focusing on reducing the number of patients who die in acute hospitals. It is argued that reducing 'inappropriate' hospital admissions will lead to an improvement in the quality of care and provide cost savings.Yet what is meant by an 'inappropriate' admission is unclear and is unlikely to be shared by all stakeholders. The decision process that leads to hospital admission is often challenging, particularly when patients are frail and elderly. The ACE study reopens the idea of 'inappropriate' hospital admissions close to the end of life. We will explore how decisions that result in inpatient admissions close to death are made and valued from the perspective of the decision-maker, and will consider the implications of these findings for current policy and practice.
DESIGN/METHODS: The study focuses on the admission of patients with advanced dementia, chest disease or cancer who die within 72 hours of admission to acute hospitals. The study uses mixed methods with three data collection phases. Phase one involves patient case studies of admissions with interviews with clinicians involved in the admission and next-of-kin. Phase two uses vignette-based focus groups with clinical professionals and patients living with the conditions of interest. Phase three uses questionnaires distributed to clinical stakeholders. Qualitative data will be explored using framework analysis whilst the questionnaire data will be examined using descriptive statistical analysis. Findings will be used to evaluate current policy and literature.
Significant ethical and validity issues arise due to the retrospective nature of phase one of the study. We are not able to gain consent from patients who have died, and the views of the deceased patients cannot be included directly, which risks privileging professional views. This phase also relies on the memories of the participants which may be unreliable. Later phases of the study attempt to compensate for the "absent voices" of the deceased patients by including next-of-kin and patient focus groups.
缓和医疗是国际政策重点。在英国,政策制定者正寻求通过关注减少在急症医院死亡的患者人数来为所有人提供高质量的护理。有人认为,减少“不适当”的住院可以提高护理质量并节省成本。然而,什么是“不适当”的入院尚不清楚,也不太可能为所有利益相关者所共享。导致住院的决策过程往往具有挑战性,尤其是当患者身体虚弱且年龄较大时。ACE 研究重新审视了临终前“不适当”住院的问题。我们将探讨接近生命终点时导致住院的决策是如何做出的,以及决策者如何看待这些决策,并考虑这些发现对当前政策和实践的影响。
设计/方法:该研究重点关注患有晚期痴呆症、胸部疾病或癌症的患者的入院情况,这些患者在入住急症医院后 72 小时内死亡。该研究采用混合方法,分三个数据收集阶段进行。第一阶段涉及患者病例研究,对参与入院的临床医生和患者的近亲属进行访谈。第二阶段使用基于情景的临床专业人员和患者焦点小组。第三阶段使用问卷调查临床利益相关者。定性数据将使用框架分析进行探索,而问卷数据将使用描述性统计分析进行检查。研究结果将用于评估现行政策和文献。
由于研究第一阶段的回顾性性质,出现了重大的伦理和有效性问题。我们无法从已死亡的患者那里获得同意,也无法直接纳入已死亡患者的观点,这可能会使专业观点占优势。该阶段还依赖于参与者的记忆,这些记忆可能不可靠。研究的后期阶段试图通过纳入近亲属和患者焦点小组来弥补已故患者的“缺席声音”。