Barriers and facilitators to care for the terminally ill: A cross-country case comparison study of Canada, England, Germany, and the United States

Author:

Klinger Christopher A12,Howell Doris3,Zakus David45,Deber Raisa B1

Affiliation:

1. Institute of Health Policy, Management & Evaluation (IHPME), University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

2. Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada

3. Lawrence S Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Ontario Cancer Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada

4. Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada

5. Division of Community Engagement, Office of Global Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada

Abstract

Background: Why do many patients not die at their preferred location? Aim: Analyze system-level characteristics influencing the ability to implement best practices in delivering care for terminally ill adults (barriers and facilitators). Design: Cross-country comparison study from a “most similar—most different” perspective, triangulating evidence from a scoping review of the literature, document analyses, and semi-structured key informant interviews. Setting: Case study of Canada, England, Germany, and the United States. Results: While similar with regard to leading causes of death, patient needs, and potential avenues to care, different models of service provision were employed in the four countries studied. Although hospice and palliative care services were generally offered with standard care along the disease continuum and in various settings, and featured common elements such as physical, psycho-social, and spiritual care, outcomes (access, utilization, etc.) varied across jurisdictions. Barriers to best practice service provision included legislative (including jurisdictional), regulatory (e.g. education and training), and financial issues as well as public knowledge and perception (“giving up hope”) challenges. Advance care planning, dedicated and stable funding toward hospice and palliative care, including caregiver benefits, population aging, and standards of practice and guidelines to hospice and palliative care, were identified as facilitators. Conclusion: Successful implementation of effective and efficient best practice approaches to care for the terminally ill, such as shared care, requires concerted action to align these system-level characteristics; many factors were identified as being essential but not sufficient. Policy implementation needs to be tailored to the respective health-care system(s), monitored, and fine-tuned.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3