Palliative care communication between patients with intellectual disabilities and hospice staff: a Conversation Analysis pilot study

Introduction
Communication challenges are among the main barriers for people with intellectual disabilities in accessing palliative care. They include inadequate skills among staff and difficulties with confirming understanding and around the presentation and assessment of symptoms. In-depth analysis of interactions between people with an intellectual disability and staff may shed light on these communicative challenges as well as facilitators. However, no studies have closely analysed the interactions between people with an intellectual disability and professionals within palliative care settings.

Methods and analysis
This protocol describes a pilot study assessing the feasibility and acceptability of conducting a Conversation Analysis study involving video-recording palliative care conversations between people with intellectual disabilities and professionals.
Three conversations between patients with an intellectual disability, their companions and palliative care staff will be video recorded in a UK hospice. Recordings will be transcribed and analysed using Conversation Analysis. Communication phenomena of interest and worth further exploration will be identified in collaboration with key stakeholders.

Ethics and dissemination
The study received a favourable opinion by a UK research ethics committee in February 2025. All participants must provide informed consent to take part in the study. It will be carefully assessed that potential participants with an intellectual disability have capacity to consent to take part. Accessible study information materials for participants with an intellectual disability are available (ie, easy-read and video).
Study findings will be disseminated in academic papers and conference presentations. Progress and findings will also be shared via social media and with relevant groups of people with intellectual disabilities, family carers, service providers and academics.

Read More

Evaluation of the outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) service in Malaysian public hospitals: a mixed-methods study protocol

Introduction
Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) is an innovative approach to manage infections that require extended courses of intravenous antibiotics by enabling patients to receive treatment in an outpatient setting. In Malaysia, there has yet to be a systematic evaluation of the OPAT service. This study aims to describe the safety, clinical indications and treatment outcomes of the OPAT service in Malaysia, assess patients’ satisfaction and experiences and determine the facilitators and barriers associated with the provision of the OPAT service in Malaysia.

Methods and analysis
A mixed-methods approach combining qualitative and quantitative methods will be employed for a comprehensive understanding of the provision of the OPAT service in Malaysian public hospitals. The study consists of four distinct parts: systematic review, retrospective cohort analysis of clinical outcomes, patients’ satisfaction survey and focus group discussions on providers’ experiences. A longitudinal analysis of the clinical outcomes (treatment success/failure, infection cure, adverse events, readmission and mortality) of the OPAT patients’ cohort will be conducted using descriptive and conclusive statistics, in addition to rates of patients’ satisfaction and evaluation of providers’ experiences.

Ethics and dissemination
This study is registered in the National Medical Research Register (NMRR ID-24-00941-2C8) and approved by the Medical Research and Ethics Committee, Ministry of Health Malaysia (Ref: 24-00941-2C8). Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants. The results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at one or more scientific conferences.

Read More

Barriers and facilitators to offering palliative care to patients with heart failure: a mixed-methods systematic review using the COM-B model and theoretical domains framework

Objectives
Despite palliative care (PC) potentially improving quality of life, only a tiny proportion of patients with heart failure (HF) are receiving PC. Globally, PC for HF patients faces several challenges; however, a systematic assessment of the barriers and facilitators to PC of patients suffering from HF is lacking. We aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to offering PC to HF patients.

Design
The mixed-methods systematic review was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement.

Data sources
PubMed, CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science were searched from onset of literature database to 24 March 2025.

Eligibility criteria
We included both qualitative studies and quantitative studies addressing barriers and facilitators to offering PC to patients with HF reported by healthcare providers, patients, family members and caregivers.

Data extraction and synthesis
Data extraction was done independently by two reviewers, and quality assessment was completed using the mixed-methods appraisal tool. The Capabilities-Opportunities-Motivations-Behaviour (COM-B) model and the Theoretical Domain Framework (TDF) were used to identify potential barriers and facilitators.

Results
48 studies were included out of 4168. 289 items related to barriers and 88 items related to facilitators were categorised into 72 themes. These themes were found to align with at least one of the 14 TDF domains and the COM-B model. ‘Environmental context and resources’ (eg, lack of time, human, facilities and equipment resources; 77.2% of barriers vs 22.8% of facilitators), ‘knowledge’ (eg, insufficient awareness and knowledge of PC and/or needs; 91.8% of barriers vs 8.2% of facilitators) and “‘social influences’ (eg, limited communication and collaboration between healthcare professionals; 58.7% of barriers vs 41.3% of facilitators) were the three TDF domains that encoded the largest amount of data.

Conclusions
This review identified key barriers to PC for HF patients, primarily involving resource limitations, knowledge gaps and poor interdisciplinary collaboration. Findings highlight the need for targeted interventions addressing systemic and knowledge-related challenges.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42023484807.

Read More