ObjectiveIn Germany, children with life-limiting conditions and complex symptoms are eligible for specialised outpatient palliative care (SOPC). In the federal state of Hesse, SOPC for children (SOPPC) is delivered by teams with paediatric expertise. While burdened by the life-limiting condition of their child, parents must also fulfill their roles as main care providers and decision makers. Collaboration between parents and SOPPC teams is important, as the intermittent care and uncertainty it entails often lasts for several months or years. We explored parents’ experiences and their demands of collaboration with SOPPC teams.MethodsWe conducted nine narrative interviews with 13 parents of children and adolescents with life-limiting conditions and used a grounded theory approach to analyse interview data.ResultsParents stressed the importance of paediatric expertise, honesty, psychosocial support, an individualised approach, experience of self-efficacy and the need to be recognised as experts for their children. The narrative interviews showed that collaboration between parents and SOPPC teams was characterised by parents’ need for specialised professional assistance and their simultaneous empowerment by SOPPC teams.ConclusionsParents’ perceptions of what good collaboration with SOPPC teams entails are manifold. To meet these complex needs, SOPPC requires time and specialised expertise.

BackgroundOral anticoagulation therapy (OAT) is a challenge in general practice, especially for high-risk groups such as the elderly. Insufficient patient knowledge about safety-relevant aspects of OAT is considered to be one of the main reasons for complications. The research question addressed in this manuscript is whether a complex intervention that includes practice-based case management, self-management of OAT and additional patient and practice team education improves patient knowledge about anticoagulation therapy compared to a control group of patients receiving usual care (as a secondary objective of the Primary Care Management for Optimised Antithrombotic Treatment (PICANT) trial).MethodsThe cluster-randomised controlled PICANT trial was conducted in 52 general practices in Germany, between 2012 and 2015. Trial participants were patients with a long-term indication for oral anticoagulation. A questionnaire was used to assess knowledge at baseline, after 12, and after 24 months. The questionnaire consists of 13 items (with a range of 0 to 13 sum-score points) covering topics related to intervention. Differences in the development of patient knowledge between intervention and control groups compared to baseline were assessed for each follow-up by means of linear mixed-effects models.ResultsSeven hundred thirty-six patients were included at baseline, of whom 95.4% continued to participate after 12 months, and 89.3% after 24 months. The average age of patients was 73.5 years (SD 9.4), and they mainly suffered from atrial fibrillation (81.1%). Patients in the intervention and control groups had similar knowledge about oral anticoagulation at baseline (5.6 (SD 2.3) in both groups). After 12 months, the improvement in the level of knowledge (compared to baseline) was significantly larger in the intervention group than in the control group (0.78 (SD 2.5) vs. 0.04 (SD 2.3); p = 0.0009). After 24 months, the difference between both groups was still statistically significant (0.6 (SD 2.6) vs. -0.3 (SD 2.3); p = 0.0001).ConclusionSince this intervention was effective, it should be established in general practice as a means of improving patient knowledge about oral anticoagulation.Trial registrationCurrent controlled trials ISRCTN41847489; Date of registration: 13/04/2012

No abstract

BackgroundOral anticoagulation (OAC) with coumarins and new anticoagulants are highly effective in preventing thromboembolic complications. However, some studies indicate that over- and under-treatment with anticoagulants are fairly common. The aim of this paper is to assess the appropriateness of treatment in patients with a long-term indication for OAC, and to describe the corresponding characteristics of such patients on the basis of screening results from the cluster randomized PICANT trial.MethodsRandomly selected family practices in the federal state of Hesse, Germany, were visited by study team members. Eligible patients were screened using an anonymous patient list that was generated by the general practitioners’ software according to predefined instructions. A documentation sheet was filled in for all screened patients. Eligible patients were classified into 3 categories (1: patients with a long-term indication for OAC and taking anticoagulants, 2: patients with a long-term indication for OAC but not taking anticoagulants, 3: patients without a long-term indication for OAC but taking an anticoagulant on a permanent basis). IBM SPSS Statistics 20 was used for descriptive statistical analysis.ResultsWe screened 2,036 randomly selected, potentially eligible patients from 52 family practices. 275 patients could not be assigned to one of the 3 categories and were therefore not considered for analysis. The final study sample comprised 1,761 screened patients, 1,641 of whom belonged to category 1, 78 to category 2, and 42 to category 3. INR values were available for 1,504 patients of whom 1,013 presented INR values within their therapeutic ranges. The majority of screened patients had very good compliance, as assessed by the general practitioner. New antithrombotic drugs were prescribed in 6.1% of cases.ConclusionsThe screening results showed that a high proportion of patients were receiving appropriate anticoagulation therapy. The numbers of patients with a long-term indication for OAC therapy that were not receiving oral anticoagulants, and without a long-term indication that were receiving OAC, were considerably lower than expected. Most patients take coumarins, and the quality of OAC control is reasonably high.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN41847489.

BackgroundIn 2007, the European Association of Palliative Care (EAPC) provided a comprehensive set of recommendations and standards for the provision of adequate pediatric palliative care. A number of studies have shown deficits in pediatric palliative care compared to EAPC standards. In Germany, pediatric palliative care patients can be referred to specialized outpatient palliative care (SOPC) services, which are known to enhance quality of life, e.g. by avoiding hospitalization. However, current regulations for the provision of SOPC in Germany do not account for the different circumstances and needs of children and their families compared to adult palliative care patients. The “Evaluation of specialized outpatient palliative care (SOPC) in the German state of Hesse (ELSAH)” study aims to perform a needs assessment for pediatric patients (children, adolescents and young adults) receiving SOPC. This paper presents the study protocol for this assessment (work package II).Methods/DesignThe study uses a sequential mixed-methods study design with a focus on qualitative research. Data collection from professional and family caregivers and, as far as possible, pediatric patients, will involve both a written questionnaire based on European recommendations for pediatric palliative care, and semi-structured interviews. Additionally, professional caregivers will take part in focus group discussions and participatory observations. Interviews and focus groups will be tape- or video-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed in accordance with the principles of grounded theory (interviews) and content analysis (focus groups). A structured field note template will be used to record notes taken during the participatory observations. Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS, version 22 or higher) will be used for descriptive statistical analyses. The qualitative data analyses will be software-assisted by MAXQDA (version 12 or higher).DiscussionThis study will provide important information on what matters most to family caregivers and pediatric patients receiving SOPC. The results will add valuable knowledge to the criteria that distinguish SOPC for pediatric from SOPC for adult patients, and will provide an indication of how the German SOPC rule of procedure can be optimized to satisfy the special needs of pediatric patients.Trial registrationInternet Portal of the German Clinical Trials Register (www.germanctr.de, DRKS-ID: DRKS00012431).