RESUMEN

Previous work found referrals for end-of-life care are made late in the dying process and assessment processes for care funding, through continuing healthcare fast-track funding often inhibit people being able to die at home. The average time to discharge was 6.3 days and 29% died in hospital, as median survival was only 15 days.We aimed to support discharge to home within 1 day by December 2023 for patients, wishing to die at home, referred to the end-of-life discharge team in a medium-sized district general hospital in Southwest England.In phase 1, we identified 13 people on a patient-by-patient basis, learning from obstacles. Barriers identified included sourcing of equipment, communication between teams and clunky paperwork. Median time to discharge was 2 days (range within 24 hours to 8 days) with 2/13 (15.4%) dying prior to discharge. In phase 2, we extended the pilot, and 104 patients were identified; 94 people were discharged to home, with a median of wait of 1 day (range 0-7) to discharge, and 10 (9.6%) died prior to discharge (median 1 day; range 0-4). Median survival from discharge for the 94 who achieved their wishes to go home to die was 9 days (range 1-205 days). Only 26/94 (27.7%) people survived more than 30 days.Rapid decision-making and structures to support home-based end-of-life care can support more people to die in their preferred place of care, by using a community-based rapid response team instead of, or in parallel with continuing healthcare fast-track funding referral applications. Current pathways and funding models are not fit for purpose in an urgent care scenario when we have only one chance to get it right.

Asunto(s)

Servicios de Atención de Salud a Domicilio , Mejoramiento de la Calidad , Cuidado Terminal , Humanos , Cuidado Terminal/métodos , Cuidado Terminal/estadística & datos numéricos , Cuidado Terminal/normas , Servicios de Atención de Salud a Domicilio/estadística & datos numéricos , Servicios de Atención de Salud a Domicilio/normas , Femenino , Inglaterra , Masculino , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Persona de Mediana Edad , Alta del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Alta del Paciente/normas

RESUMEN

Transplantation has made a considerable difference to the lives of many patients. However, feedback from patients indicates that although having a transplant is a hugely positive experience, having to take medications indefinitely is one of the biggest challenges. An ideal scenario would be no medications following a transplant. A compromise would be a minimal number of medications, with minimal restrictions and as simple a regimen as possible. Although there is considerable research going into fine-tuning the management of the immune response to a transplant, to date there is no universal regimen that enables patients to remain free of immunosuppressant medications, making adherence paramount to maintain long-term allograft survival. This paper reviews the available immunosuppressant regimens and factors influencing choice from both the clinician's and the patient's perspective. Factors influencing the decision-making process, such as quality of life for patients, their satisfaction, acceptability, and adherence uptake are reviewed. We conclude with a further assessment of patient choice as a factor in regimen selection, its impact on adherence, and its implications.