Where and by whom do patients want to be cared for: Preferences for the Breathlessness Support Service in England?

D. Yi, Anna Johnston, Evelyne Burssens, M. Teixeira, W. Gao, C. Reilly, I. Higginson
{"title":"Where and by whom do patients want to be cared for: Preferences for the Breathlessness Support Service in England?","authors":"D. Yi, Anna Johnston, Evelyne Burssens, M. Teixeira, W. Gao, C. Reilly, I. Higginson","doi":"10.1183/13993003.congress-2019.pa1966","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Chronic breathlessness is associated with reduced health related quality of life and high service utilisation. Breathlessness Support Service (BSS), combining palliative and respiratory medicine, was developed to address the unmet needs of patients with chronic breathlessness. Aims: To identify factors of BSS valued by potential users (older patients (65≥) and families) and suggest models of BSS to be prioritised. Method: Face to face interviews among patients with COPD, lung cancer or interstitial lung disease, and carers. Discrete choice experiment attributes were determined from literature, expert consultation and interviews. Regression was used to analyse the data and free text answers to open-ended questions were thematically analysed. Results: 6 attributes (consultation; review; additional support; expectation for mobility & health service use; waiting time) were identified. There were 190 patients and 68 carers from 9 sites in England. Any BSS was preferred to no service. BSS with a consultant was preferred but BSS with a GP or nurse at GP clinic was not. Expectation for mobility or health service use was not important but review of medicinal treatments and waiting time was. Carers preferred additional support and patients preferred a consultant. GPs were thought to lack breathlessness specialism. GP surgery was avoided by some patients due to infection risk. Conclusion: Older patients and carers want services provided by consultant, review of medicinal treatments, home visit by a therapist and support from a social worker. GP’s role in caring for this population needs reconsidering. BSS based on user’s preferences will improve acceptance and outcomes.","PeriodicalId":243267,"journal":{"name":"Ethics and Economics","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.congress-2019.pa1966","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Chronic breathlessness is associated with reduced health related quality of life and high service utilisation. Breathlessness Support Service (BSS), combining palliative and respiratory medicine, was developed to address the unmet needs of patients with chronic breathlessness. Aims: To identify factors of BSS valued by potential users (older patients (65≥) and families) and suggest models of BSS to be prioritised. Method: Face to face interviews among patients with COPD, lung cancer or interstitial lung disease, and carers. Discrete choice experiment attributes were determined from literature, expert consultation and interviews. Regression was used to analyse the data and free text answers to open-ended questions were thematically analysed. Results: 6 attributes (consultation; review; additional support; expectation for mobility & health service use; waiting time) were identified. There were 190 patients and 68 carers from 9 sites in England. Any BSS was preferred to no service. BSS with a consultant was preferred but BSS with a GP or nurse at GP clinic was not. Expectation for mobility or health service use was not important but review of medicinal treatments and waiting time was. Carers preferred additional support and patients preferred a consultant. GPs were thought to lack breathlessness specialism. GP surgery was avoided by some patients due to infection risk. Conclusion: Older patients and carers want services provided by consultant, review of medicinal treatments, home visit by a therapist and support from a social worker. GP’s role in caring for this population needs reconsidering. BSS based on user’s preferences will improve acceptance and outcomes.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
病人希望在哪里和由谁来照顾:对英国呼吸困难支持服务的偏好?
背景:慢性呼吸困难与健康相关的生活质量降低和高服务利用率有关。呼吸困难支持服务(BSS)是一种结合姑息治疗和呼吸治疗的服务,旨在解决慢性呼吸困难患者的需求。目的:确定潜在用户(老年患者(65岁以上)和家庭)重视的BSS因素,并建议优先考虑的BSS模型。方法:对慢性阻塞性肺病、肺癌或间质性肺疾病患者及其护理人员进行面对面访谈。通过文献资料、专家咨询和访谈确定离散选择实验属性。使用回归分析数据,并对开放式问题的自由文本答案进行主题分析。结果:6个属性(会诊;审查;额外的支持;对流动和保健服务使用的期望;等待时间)。共有190名患者和68名护理人员来自英格兰的9个地点。任何BSS都比没有服务要好。有咨询师的BSS是首选,但没有全科医生或全科医生诊所的护士的BSS。对行动能力或保健服务使用的期望并不重要,但对药物治疗和等待时间的审查很重要。护理人员更喜欢额外的支持,而患者更喜欢咨询师。全科医生被认为缺乏呼吸困难专科。由于感染风险,部分患者避免GP手术。结论:老年患者和护理人员需要咨询师提供的服务、药物治疗的回顾、治疗师的家访和社会工作者的支持。全科医生在照顾这一人群中的角色需要重新考虑。基于用户偏好的BSS将提高接受度和结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Cost-effectiveness of single-inhaler triple therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease treatment by baseline blood eosinophil count: IMPACT trial Late Breaking Abstract - Variable costs of sepsis in a Greek ICU Analysis of intubate / do not intubate orders in COVID-19 patients Cost Effectiveness Comparison of a Dry Powder Inhaler to a Metered Dose Inhaler plus Valved Holding Chamber based on a Functional Respiratory Imaging (FRI) Model Living with a tracheostomy in MND: A qualitative review of patient and carer perspective
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1