Feasibility of a child life specialist program for oncology patients with minor children at home: Demand and implementation.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 28-28
Author(s):  
David Lysecki ◽  
Daryl Bainbridge ◽  
Tracy Akitt ◽  
Georgia Georgiou ◽  
Ralph M. Meyer ◽  
...  

28 Background: Up to 24% of adult oncology patients have minor children at home. Children may experience emotional problems, somatic complaints, social isolation, depression, and post-traumatic stress as a result. Typical support networks often fail to meet the needs of these families. To address this gap, an innovative Child Life Specialist (CLS) program for patients with minor children at home was offered at a tertiary oncology center. Methods: To understand the feasibility of this program, we examined the demand for and implementation of the CLS program over its initial 10 months. Demand was characterized using administrative data (referred patient/family demographics, referral details, and disease/treatment characteristics). Implementation was described through encounter data (audience, type of visit, interventions provided, time for preparation, and time of direct interaction for each encounter). Results: The program received 100 referrals, 93 of whom accessed the program. Patients were most often female (66%) with a median age of 45 years (range: 19 to 72). 81% were parents of minor children, 10% grandparents, and 9% other. Families predominantly had multiple children (98%), most commonly school-aged (ages 5-9, 39%; 10-14, 37%). 53% of families had two birth parents co-parenting in the same household; the remainder had alternate parent/living scenarios. Most referrals came from social work (57%). Median time from diagnosis to referral was 79 days (range: 9d-6.5y). Breast cancer (26%) was the most common diagnosis, followed by gastrointestinal (19%) and hematologic (16%). Cancer phase at referral was defined as at new diagnosis (within 30d, 18%), undergoing treatment with curative intent (20%), undergoing treatment with palliative intent (39%), at end of life (within 30d, 16%) and after death/bereavement (5%). 1 patient (1%) did not have cancer. The CLS recorded 257 unique encounters. 55% of encounters included patients, 40% non-patient parents, 21% children, and 21% others. 75% were individual encounters, while 25% were group encounters. 95% of encounters that included children also included an adult. Phone calls were the most frequent encounter type (43%), but hospital visits consumed the largest proportion of recorded CLS time (38%). Mean encounter time (all visit types) included 20min for preparation and 51min of direct interaction. CLS interventions included: guidance on talking with children (67% of encounters), providing resources (37%), diagnostic teaching (21%), end-of-life support (18%), discussing change in status (10%), grief (8%), and emotional expression (4%). Conclusions: This study characterized the demand for this program and described its implementation over the pilot period. This period occurred during the Covid-19 pandemic, which dramatically altered healthcare and family visitation, likely influencing the results of this study.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 94-97
Author(s):  
Xiomara Garcia ◽  
Elizabeth Frazier ◽  
Janie Kane ◽  
Amber Jones ◽  
Carrie Brown ◽  
...  

Objective: To present our center’s experience with terminal extubation in 3 palliative critical care home transports from the Pediatric Cardiac Intensive Unit. Design: All cases were identified from our Cardiovascular intensive care unit ( CVICU). Patients were terminally ill children with no other surgical or medical option who were transported home between 2014 and 2018, for terminal extubation and end-of-life care according to their families’ wishes. Interventions: The patients were 7, 9 months, and 19 years; and they had very complex and chronic conditions. The families were approached by the CVICU staff during multidisciplinary meetings, where goals of care were established. Parental expectations were clarified, and palliative care team was involved, as well as home hospice was arranged pre transfer. The transfer process was discussed and all the needs were established. All patients had unstable medical conditions, with needs for transport for withdrawal of life support and death at home. Each case needed a highly trained team to support life while in transport. The need of these patients required coordination with home palliative care services, as well as community resources due to difficulty to get in their homes. Conclusions: Transportation of pediatric cardiac critical care patients for terminal extubation at home is a relatively infrequent practice. It is a feasible alternative for families seeking out of the hospital end-of-life care for their critically ill and technology dependent children. Our single-center experience supports the need for development of formal programs for end-of-life critical care transports.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 30-30
Author(s):  
David Lysecki ◽  
Daryl Bainbridge ◽  
Tracy Akitt ◽  
Georgia Georgiou ◽  
Ralph M. Meyer ◽  
...  

30 Background: Up to 24% of adult oncology patients have minor children at home, who may experience negative short- and long-term health outcomes as a result. Typical support networks often fail to meet the needs of these families. To address this, an innovative Child Life Specialist (CLS) program was embedded within the psychosocial support team at a tertiary oncology center. The program provided direct consultation to families (adults and children) including guidance on talking with children, provision of resources, diagnostic teaching, end-of-life support, grief support, and emotional expression. Methods: To understand the feasibility of this program (including acceptability, demand, implementation, practicality, adaptation, integration, expansion, and preliminary measures of impact), we collected 360-degree feedback from impacted stakeholders. At least two months following an encounter with the CLS, families were offered participation in a semi-structured interview (via purposive selection to capture multiple perspectives, including patients, non-patient parents/family members, and children aged 10-17). At the end of the pilot, two focus groups were held consisting of clinicians who engaged with the program. A thematic analysis was completed from the interview/focus group discussion transcripts. Results: 15 interviews were completed with adults (ten with patients, five with non-patient parents/other family members). Emergent themes were: Establishing comfort, Allaying parent apprehension, Coaching and reassurance, Value added, Integration, Impact of Covid-19, and Areas for development. In three interviews with children, the emergent themes were: Building rapport, Developmentally appropriate approaches, Understanding and managing emotions, Improving communication, and Areas for development. The first focus group included the CLS and two clinical leads of the psychosocial support team. Emergent themes from this discussion were: Promotion of the program, Accessibility, Role of social work, Impact of Covid-19, and Adopting a virtual approach. The second focus group consisted of three inpatient social workers, and the emergent themes were: Expertise, Accessibility, Allaying parent apprehension, Value added, Impact of Covid-19, and Areas for development. Synthesis of data identified five overall key themes: Awareness, Integration, Value added, Family-centered care, and Impact of Covid-19. Conclusions: This study conducted qualitative analysis of 360-degree feedback on the CLS pilot program. The analysis demonstrated that program was felt to add value, integrate well with current systems, and represent high-quality, family-centered care. This pilot occurred during the Covid-19 pandemic, the impacts of which were represented in this study.


2009 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katie V. Parvin ◽  
George E. Dickinson

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Femmy M. Bijnsdorp ◽  
Bregje D. Onwuteaka-Philipsen ◽  
Cécile R.L. Boot ◽  
Allard J. van der Beek ◽  
Hanna T. Klop ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Population ageing, an emphasis on home-based care of palliative patients and policies aimed at prolonging participation in the labour market are placing a growing demand on working family caregivers. This study aimed to provide insight into experiences with combining paid work and family care for patients at the end of life, factors facilitating and hindering this combination, and support needs. Method Semi-structured interviews were held between July 2018 and July 2019 with 18 working family caregivers of patients with a life-threatening illness who were living at home. Transcripts were analysed following the principles of thematic analysis. Results Some family caregivers could combine paid work and family care successfully, while this combination was burdensome for others. Family caregivers generally experienced a similar process in which four domains — caregiver characteristics, the care situation, the work situation and the context — influenced their experiences, feelings and needs regarding either the combination of paid work and care or the care situation in itself. In turn, experiences, feelings and needs sometimes affected health and wellbeing, or prompted caregivers to take actions or strategies to improve the situation. Changes in health and wellbeing could affect the situation in the four domains. Good health, flexibility and support at work, support from healthcare professionals and sharing care tasks were important in helping balance work and care responsibilities. Some caregivers felt ‘sandwiched’ between work and care and reported physical or mental health complaints. Conclusions Experiences with combining paid work and family care at the end of life are diverse and depend on several factors. If too many factors are out of balance, family caregivers experience stress and this impacts their health and wellbeing. Family caregivers could be better supported in this by healthcare professionals, employers and local authorities.


2021 ◽  
pp. 026921632110233
Author(s):  
Cari Malcolm ◽  
Katherine Knighting

Background: End-of-life care for children with life-shortening conditions is provided in a range of settings including hospital, hospice and home. What home-based, end-of-life care should entail or what best practice might look like is not widely reported, particularly from the perspective of parents who experienced the death of a child at home. Aim: To explore the value and assess the effectiveness of an innovative model of care providing home-based, end-of-life care as perceived by families who accessed the service. Design: A qualitative descriptive study design was employed with in-depth semi-structured interviews conducted with bereaved parents. Setting/participants: Thirteen bereaved parents of 10 children supported by the home-based end-of-life care service. Results: Parents reported effective aspects of end-of-life care provided at home to include: (1) ability to facilitate changes in preferred place of death; (2) trusted relationships with care providers who really know the child and family; (3) provision of child and family-centred care; (4) specialist care and support provided by the service as and when needed; and (5) quality and compassionate death and bereavement care. Parents proposed recommendations for future home-based end-of-life care including shared learning, improving access to home-based care for other families and dispelling hospice myths. Conclusion: Parents with experience of caring for a dying child at home offer valuable input to future the policy and practice surrounding effective home-based, end-of-life care for children. New models of care or service developments should consider the key components and attributes for effective home-based end-of-life identified by bereaved parents in this study.


2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 876-877
Author(s):  
W. Zhu ◽  
T. De Silva ◽  
L. Eades ◽  
S. Morton ◽  
S. Ayoub ◽  
...  

Background:Telemedicine was widely utilised to complement face-to-face (F2F) care in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic, but the impact of this on patient care is poorly understood.Objectives:To investigate the impact of telemedicine during COVID-19 on outpatient rheumatology services.Methods:We retrospectively audited patient electronic medical records from rheumatology outpatient clinics in an urban tertiary rheumatology centre between April-May 2020 (telemedicine cohort) and April-May 2019 (comparator cohort). Differences in age, sex, primary diagnosis, medications, and proportion of new/review appointments were assessed using Mann-Whitney U and Chi-square tests. Univariate analysis was used to estimate associations between telemedicine usage and the ability to assign a diagnosis in patients without a prior rheumatological diagnosis, the frequency of changes to immunosuppression, subsequent F2F review, planned admissions or procedures, follow-up phone calls, and time to next appointment.Results:3,040 outpatient appointments were audited: 1,443 from 2019 and 1,597 from 2020. There was no statistically significant difference in the age, sex, proportion of new/review appointments, or frequency of immunosuppression use between the cohorts. Inflammatory arthritis (IA) was a more common diagnosis in the 2020 cohort (35.1% vs 31%, p=0.024). 96.7% (n=1,444) of patients seen in the 2020 cohort were reviewed via telemedicine. In patients without an existing rheumatological diagnosis, the odds of making a diagnosis at the appointment were significantly lower in 2020 (28.6% vs 57.4%; OR 0.30 [95% CI 0.16-0.53]; p<0.001). Clinicians were also less likely to change immunosuppressive therapy in 2020 (22.6% vs 27.4%; OR 0.78 [95% CI 0.65-0.92]; p=0.004). This was mostly driven by less de-escalation in therapy (10% vs 12.6%; OR 0.75 [95% CI 0.59-0.95]; p=0.019) as there was no statistically significant difference in the escalation or switching of immunosuppressive therapies. There was no significant difference in frequency of follow-up phone calls, however, patients seen in 2020 required earlier follow-up appointments (p<0.001). There was also no difference in unplanned rheumatological presentations but significantly fewer planned admissions and procedures in 2020 (1% vs 2.6%, p=0.002). Appointment non-attendance reduced in 2020 to 6.5% from 10.9% in 2019 (OR 0.57 [95% CI 0.44-0.74]; p<0.001), however the odds of discharging a patient from care were significantly lower in 2020 (3.9% vs 6%; OR 0.64 [95% CI 0.46-0.89]; p=0.008), although there was no significance when patients who failed to attend were excluded. Amongst patients seen via telemedicine in 2020, a subsequent F2F appointment was required in 9.4%. The predictors of needing a F2F review were being a new patient (OR 6.28 [95% CI 4.10-9.64]; p<0.001), not having a prior rheumatological diagnosis (OR 18.43 [95% CI: 2.35-144.63]; p=0.006), or having a diagnosis of IA (OR 2.85 [95% CI: 1.40-5.80]; p=0.004) or connective tissue disease (OR 3.22 [95% CI: 1.11-9.32]; p=0.031).Conclusion:Most patients in the 2020 cohort were seen via telemedicine. Telemedicine use during the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with reduced clinic non-attendance, but with diagnostic delay, reduced likelihood of changing existing immunosuppressive therapy, earlier requirement for review, and lower likelihood of discharge. While the effects of telemedicine cannot be differentiated from changes in practice related to other aspects of the pandemic, they suggest that telemedicine may have a negative impact on the timeliness of management of rheumatology patients.Disclosure of Interests:None declared.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document