Evaluating palliative care case conferences in primary care for patients with advanced non-malignant chronic conditions: a cluster-randomised controlled trial (KOPAL)

• DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afae100
• Publication Date: 2024-05-24T07:36:50Z
• Authors: Tina Mallon; Josefine Schulze; Judith Dams; Jan Weber; Thomas Asendorf; Silke Böttcher; Uta Sekanina; Franziska Schade; Nils Schneider; Michael Freitag; Christiane Müller; Hans-Helmut König; Friedemann Nauck; Tim Friede; Martin Scherer; Gabriella Marx
• Keywords: Male; Aged, 80 and over; Heart Failure; Patient Care Team; Time Factors; Primary Health Care; Delivery of Health Care, Integrated; Palliative Care; Clinical Trial; Home Care Services; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; 03 medical and health sciences; 0302 clinical medicine; Germany; Chronic Disease; Quality of Life; Humans; Female; Dementia; Interdisciplinary Communication; Aged

Abstract

Background Patients with congestive heart failure (CHF), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and dementia are underrepresented in specialist palliative home care (SPHC). However, the complexity of their conditions requires collaboration between general practitioners (GPs) and SPHC teams and timely integration into SPHC to effectively meet their needs.

Objective To facilitate joint palliative care planning and the timely transfer of patients with advanced chronic non-malignant conditions to SPHC.

Methods A two-arm, unblinded, cluster-randomised controlled trial. 49 GP practices in northern Germany were randomised using web-based block randomisation. We included patients with advanced CHF, COPD and/or dementia. The KOPAL intervention consisted of a SPHC nurse–patient consultation followed by an interprofessional telephone case conference between SPHC team and GP. The primary outcome was the number of hospital admissions 48 weeks after baseline. Secondary analyses examined the effects on health-related quality of life and self-rated health status, as measured by the EuroQol 5D scale.

Results A total of 172 patients were included in the analyses. 80.4% of GP practices had worked with SHPC before, most of them exclusively for cancer patients. At baseline, patients reported a mean EQ-VAS of 48.4, a mean quality of life index (EQ-5D-5L) of 0.63 and an average of 0.80 hospital admissions in the previous year. The intervention did not significantly reduce hospital admissions (incidence rate ratio = 0.79, 95%CI: [0.49, 1.26], P = 0.31) or the number of days spent in hospital (incidence rate ratio = 0.65, 95%CI: [0.28, 1.49], P = 0.29). There was also no significant effect on quality of life (∆ = −0.02, 95%CI: [−0.09, 0.05], P = 0.53) or self-rated health (∆ = −2.48, 95%CI: [−9.95, 4.99], P = 0.51).

Conclusions The study did not show the hypothesised effect on hospitalisations and health-related quality of life. Future research should focus on refining this approach, with particular emphasis on optimising the timing of case conferences and implementing discussed changes to treatment plans, to improve collaboration between GPs and SPHC teams.