This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Todd, C J Articles by Farquhar, M C Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Todd, C J Articles by Farquhar, M C Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Home Care Services Palliative Care Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

General practitioners' and district nurses' views of hospital at home for palliative care

G E Grande

S IG Barclay

M C Farquhar

Health Services Research Group, General Practice and Primary Care Research Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge

Cambridge Hospital at Home (CH@H) provides 24-h nursing in a patient's own home to patients requiring terminal and palliative respite care. To investigate views of the service, we surveyed all GPs and district nurses (DNs) in the catchment area of the scheme. Responses were received from 85% of DNs and 65% of GPs.

The majority of DNs (93%) and GPs (57%) had patients referred to CH@H, whereas 90% of DNs and 42% GPs had patients admitted. The most commonly reported reason for non-referral was lack of availability of places (GPs 62%; DNs 63%). Ninety per cent DNs and 84% GPs rated continuation of the scheme as important. The most important reported benefits were 24-h care (GPs 84%; DNs 82%) and help in keeping patients at home (GPs 69%; DNs 83%). Seventy-four DNs also considered help in arranging discharge to be important. Almost half GPs and DNs considered CH@H worse than other NHS services in terms of availability and limits on the duration of care. Whilst 65% of DNs thought CH@H had reduced workload, 77% GPs reported it had made no difference or had increased it. Most indicated that CH@H made a difference in allowing patients to die at home (GPs 60%; DNs 68%).

The CH@H scheme is viewed as beneficial for patients requiring palliative care at home, although GPs and DNs expressed realistic reservations about specific aspects of the scheme. With the emergence of Primary Care Trusts, NHS commissioning of hospice at home services will more firmly rest with primary care practitioners, who on balance clearly prize them.

Key Words: district nurses • general practitioners • hospital at home • palliative care • professional views • questionnaire survey

Palliative Medicine, Vol. 16, No. 3, 251-254 (2002)
DOI: 10.1191/0269216302pm513oa


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. Goldschmidt, M. Groenvold, A. T. Johnsen, A. S Stromgren, A. Krasnik, and L. Schmidt Cooperating with a palliative home-care team: expectations and evaluations of GPs and district nurses Palliative Medicine, April 1, 2005; 19(3): 241 - 250. [Abstract] [PDF]