Comparing quality indicator rates for home care clients receiving palliative and end-of-life care before and during the Covid-19 pandemic

The consensus among Canadians with regards to end-of-life preferences is that with adequate support the majority prefer to live and die at home. To compare quality indicator (QI) rates for home care clients receiving palliative and end-of-life care prior to and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandem...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:BMC palliative care 2024-01, Vol.23 (1), p.11-11, Article 11
Hauptverfasser: Kruizinga, Julia, Fisher, Kathryn, Guthrie, Dawn, Northwood, Melissa, Kaasalainen, Sharon
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The consensus among Canadians with regards to end-of-life preferences is that with adequate support the majority prefer to live and die at home. To compare quality indicator (QI) rates for home care clients receiving palliative and end-of-life care prior to and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. A retrospective population-based cohort design was used. Sixteen QIs informed by existing literature and a preliminary set of QIs recently evaluated by a modified Delphi panel were compared. Data were obtained from the interRAI Palliative Care instrument for Ontario home care clients for two separate cohorts: the pre-COVID (January 14, 2019 to March 16, 2020) and COVID cohort (March 17, 2020 to May 18, 2021). A propensity score analysis was used to match (using nearest neighbour matching) on 21 covariates, resulting in a sample size of 2479 unique interRAI Palliative Care assessments in each cohort. Alternative propensity score methods were explored as part of a sensitivity analysis. After matching the pre-COVID and COVID cohorts, five of the 16 QIs had statistically significant differences in the QI rates (change from pre-COVID to COVID): decrease in prevalence of severe or excruciating daily pain (p = 0.03, effect size=-0.08), decrease in prevalence of caregiver distress (p = 0.02, effect size=-0.06), decrease in prevalence of negative mood (p = 0.003, effect size=- 0.17), decrease in prevalence of a delirium-like syndrome (p = 0.001, effect size=-0.25) and decrease in prevalence of nausea or vomiting (p = 0.04, effect size=-0.06). While the alternative propensity score methods produced slightly different results, no clinically meaningful differences were seen between the cohorts when effect sizes were examined. All methods were in agreement regarding the highest QI rates, which included the prevalence of shortness of breath with activity, no advance directives, and fatigue. This study is the first to examine differences in QI rates for home care clients receiving palliative and end-of-life care before and during COVID in Ontario. It appears that QI rates did not change over the course of the pandemic in this population. Future work should be directed to understanding the temporal variation in these QI rates, risk-adjusting the QI rates for further comparison among jurisdictions, provinces, and countries, and in creating benchmarks for determining acceptable rates of different QIs.
ISSN:1472-684X
1472-684X
DOI:10.1186/s12904-023-01336-9