Display options
Share it on

Zdr Varst. 2018 Apr 06;57(2):55-64. doi: 10.2478/sjph-2018-0008. eCollection 2018 Jun.

Early Identification of Patients in Need of Palliative Care in Slovenian General Practice.

Zdravstveno varstvo

Lisette Klok, Yvonne Engels, Carel Veldhoven, Danica Rotar Pavlič

Affiliations

  1. Radboud University Medical Center, Faculty of Medicine, Regenwulp 19Breda, 4822 RJ, the Netherlands.
  2. Radboud University Medical Center, Department of Anaesthesiology, Pain and Palliative Medicine, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
  3. University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Family Medicine, Poljanski nasip 58, 1000Ljubljana, Slovenia.

PMID: 29651316 PMCID: PMC5894459 DOI: 10.2478/sjph-2018-0008

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To help general practitioners (GPs) in early identification of patients with palliative care (PC) needs, this pilot study aimed to determine the potential of the combined original surprise question (SQ1) ('Would I be surprised if this patient died within the next 12 months?') and the second surprise question (SQ2) ('Would I be surprised if this patient was still alive after 12 months?'). We hypothesized that answering these SQs would trigger them to make a multidimensional care plan.

METHODS: 26 Slovenian GPs, randomized into 4 groups, were invited to write a care plan for each of the four patients described in case vignettes (2 oncologic, 1 organ failure and 1 frailty case). GPs in group 1 were only asked to write a care plan for each patient. GPs in group 2 answered SQ1 and GPs in groups 3 and 4 answered SQ1 and SQ2 before writing the care plan. The type and number of PC aspects mentioned in the respective care plans were quantified into a numeric RADboud ANTicipatory (RADIANT) score.

RESULTS: Mean RADIANT scores in groups 1-4 were 2.2, 3.6, 2.5 and 3.1, respectively. When comparing the different vignettes, vignette B (terminal oncologic patient) scored best (3.6). Mean RADIANT scores in groups 3 and 4 were slightly higher for GPs who would be surprised compared to GPs who would not be surprised if the patient was still alive in 12 months.

CONCLUSION: The combined SQs were considered helpful in the early identification of patients in need of PC in Slovenian general practice.

Keywords: Slovenia; cancer; dementia; frail elderly; general practitioners; organ failure; palliative care; surprise question

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of interest: The authors declare that no conflicts of interest exist.

References

  1. Zdr Varst. 2015 Dec 16;55(1):86-95 - PubMed
  2. CMAJ. 2017 Apr 3;189(13):E484-E493 - PubMed
  3. BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2016 Apr 18;:null - PubMed
  4. Br J Gen Pract. 2012 Sep;62(602):e625-31 - PubMed
  5. BMC Fam Pract. 2013 Mar 25;14:42 - PubMed
  6. Health Syst Transit. 2016 Jun;18(3):1-207 - PubMed
  7. BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2017 Mar;7(1):32-38 - PubMed
  8. BMC Fam Pract. 2011 Nov 03;12:123 - PubMed
  9. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Jun 06;(6):CD007760 - PubMed
  10. Palliat Med. 2005 Mar;19(2):111-8 - PubMed
  11. Zdr Varst. 2015 Dec 16;55(1):78-85 - PubMed
  12. BMC Fam Pract. 2015 Sep 22;16:126 - PubMed
  13. Fam Pract. 2003 Feb;20(1):58-60 - PubMed
  14. Palliat Med. 2014 Jun;28(6):480-490 - PubMed
  15. BMC Med. 2017 Aug 2;15(1):139 - PubMed
  16. J Clin Oncol. 2009 Jan 10;27(2):206-13 - PubMed
  17. Psychooncology. 2012 Oct;21(10):1027-33 - PubMed
  18. Palliat Med. 2014 Mar 18;28(7):965-975 - PubMed
  19. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2002 Aug;24(2):233-5 - PubMed
  20. J Palliat Med. 2010 Jul;13(7):837-40 - PubMed
  21. BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2011 Jun;1(1):56-63 - PubMed
  22. Int J Nurs Pract. 2009 Feb;15(1):41-7 - PubMed
  23. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2009 Oct;38(4):568-77 - PubMed
  24. JAMA. 2009 Aug 19;302(7):741-9 - PubMed
  25. Palliat Med. 2014 Mar 24;28(7):959-964 - PubMed
  26. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2017 Sep;34(8):762-773 - PubMed

Publication Types