Background:In the United Kingdom, an approach to improving end-of-life care has been the introduction of ‘just in case’ or ‘anticipatory’ medications. Nurses are often responsible for deciding when to use anticipatory medications, but little is known about their experiences.Aim:To examine nurses’ decisions, aims and concerns when using anticipatory medications.Design:An ethnographic study in two UK regions, using observations and interviews with nurses working in community and nursing home teams (n = 8).Findings:Observations (n = 83) and interviews (n = 61) with community nurses. Nurses identified four ‘conditions’ that needed to be established before they implemented anticipatory medications: (1) irreversibility; (2) inability to take oral medication; (3) where the patient was able, they should consent and (4) decision had to be independent of demands or requests from patient’s relatives. By using anticipation medications, nurses sought to enable patients to be ‘comfortable and settled’ by provision of gradual relief of symptoms at the lowest dose possible. They aimed to respond quickly to needs, seeking to avoid hospital admission or medical call-out, while adhering to local prescribing policies. Worries included distinguishing between pain and agitation, balancing risks of under- and over-medication and the possibility of hastening death.Conclusion:Nurses take a leading role in the administration of anticipatory medications. Nurses apply consideration and caution to the administration of anticipatory medications but some experience emotional burden. Education, training and experience played a role in the nurses’ confidence and should continue to be central to efforts to improving the quality of palliative care in the community and nursing homes.

BackgroundThe provision of institutional long-term care for older people varies across Europe reflecting different models of health care delivery. Care for dying residents requires integration of palliative care into current care work, but little is known internationally of the different ways in which palliative care is being implemented in the care home setting.ObjectivesTo identify and classify, using a new typology, the variety of different strategic, operational, and organizational activities related to palliative care implementation in care homes across Europe.Design and methodsWe undertook a mapping exercise in 29 European countries, using 2 methods of data collection: (1) a survey of country informants, and (2) a review of data from publically available secondary data sources and published research. Through a descriptive and thematic analysis of the survey data, we identified factors that contribute to the development and implementation of palliative care into care homes at different structural levels. From these data, a typology of palliative care implementation for the care home sector was developed and applied to the countries surveyed.ResultsWe identified 3 levels of palliative care implementation in care homes: macro (national/regional policy, legislation, financial and regulatory drivers), meso (implementation activities, such as education, tools/frameworks, service models, and research), and micro (palliative care service delivery). This typology was applied to data collected from 29 European countries and demonstrates the diversity of palliative care implementation activity across Europe with respect to the scope, type of development, and means of provision. We found that macro and meso factors at 2 levels shape palliative care implementation and provision in care homes at the micro organizational level.ConclusionsImplementation at the meso and micro levels is supported by macro-level engagement, but can happen with limited macro strategic drivers. Ensuring the delivery of consistent and high-quality palliative care in care homes is supported by implementation activity at these 3 levels. Understanding where each country is in terms of activity at these 3 levels (macro, meso, and micro) will allow strategic focus on future implementation work in each country.

Abstract Objectives inconsistency in outcome measurement in dementia care trials impedes the comparisons of effectiveness between trials. The key aim of this study is to establish an agreed standardised core outcome set (COS) for use when evaluating non-pharmacological health and social care interventions for people with dementia living at home. Method we used a mixed-methods research design, including substantive qualitative research with five key stakeholders groups. We consulted with people living with dementia for many aspects of this research. We applied a modified two-round 54 item Delphi approach to attain consensus on core outcomes. The COS was finalised in a face-to-face consensus meeting in 2018. Results of the 288 who completed round 1 (21 people living with dementia, 58 care partners, 137 relevant health and social care professionals, 60 researchers, 12 policy makers), 246 completed round 2 (85% response rate). Twenty participants attended the consensus meeting. We reached consensus for the inclusion of 13 outcome items. Conclusion we identified 13 outcome items which are considered core; many relate to social health. Providing there are adequate measures, measuring these core outcome items will enhance comparisons for effectiveness making trial evidence more useful. The items will provide commissioners and service planners with information on what types of interventions are most likely to be valued highly by people living with dementia. Trial registration The study is registered on the COMET initiative database.

In this paper, we draw on narrative correspondence from older male spousal caregivers and interviews with care providers from the voluntary and statutory sectors to explore how older male carers in the UK cope with and experience care-giving, the forms of support they draw upon, and how this impacts on their sense of self and identity as older men. We also consider how (or if) gender plays a part in shaping the forms of formal care support extended to male carers. We conclude, that how older men construct and perform care-giving, and how the wider family and community respond to older men as carers, can impact on how they perform masculinity. This in turn can contribute to a decline in their social networks and opportunities for sociability, leading to increased loneliness and social isolation. Such insights are important if we are to enrich our knowledge of the challenges they face, the coping mechanisms they employ, and the extent to which their support needs are met in their caring role. WHAT IS KNOWN ABOUT THE TOPIC.

No abstract