Irene Tuffrey-Wijne

The palliative care needs of people with intellectual disabilities: a literature review

People with intellectual disabilities are among the most disadvantaged groups in society. A literature review was conducted aiming to answer the following question: What are the palliative care needs of people with intellectual disabilities? The literature review covers case histories, morbidity and mortality patterns for people with intellectual disabilities, their healthcare needs and primary care provision, the way they may present symptoms, their conceptualization of illness and death and issues around education and training. While the literature review reveals a lack of empirical data around the palliative care needs of people with intellectual disabilities, a number of potential problem areas are highlighted. These include late presentation of illness, difficulties in assessing symptoms, difficulties in understanding the illness and its implications and ethical issues around decision making and consent to treatment. It is suggested that future studies will need to include the views and experiences of people with intellectual disabilities themselves. Areas for possible future development include symptom assessment, evaluation of current practice and access to services and the development of information and training materials.

Co-researching with people with learning disabilities: an experience of involvement in qualitative data analysis.

Background  People with learning disabilities have been included in research as co‐researchers since the 1990s. However, there is limited literature about the processes of involving people with learning disabilities in the more intellectual and analytical stages of the research process.

End-of-life decisions: an important theme in the care for people with intellectual disabilities

BACKGROUND While end-of-life decisions in the general population have received attention in several countries, not much is known about this in people with intellectual disabilities (IDs). Therefore, the prevalence and nature of end-of-life decisions were investigated in a Dutch centre providing residential care for 335 people with IDs. METHOD A retrospective study of medical files of people who died between January 2002 and July 2007. RESULTS One or more end-of-life decisions were taken in 27 out of 47 cases. A non-treatment decision was taken for seven residents, possibly shortening life expectancy in some cases. The family was involved in decision making in half of the 27 cases. No information was found about the process of end-of-life decision making. There was no evidence in the notes that any of the people with IDs was asked for his or her own opinion in taking an end-of-life decision. CONCLUSION This study demonstrates that medical end-of-life decisions played a part in significant numbers of people with IDs who have died within this centre, but further studies are needed to establish decision-making processes.

Palliative care provision for people with intellectual disabilities: a questionnaire survey of specialist palliative care professionals

There is a growing interest in the palliative care needs of people with intellectual disabilities (ID). There are indications that palliative care staff face particular problems providing care to this group, but empirical data about the extent of the problem are lacking. This study aims to gain insight into the current use of palliative care services by people with ID in London, to identify the prevalence and severity of problems faced by palliative care professionals and to identify strategies that will facilitate an improvement in access and delivery of palliative care services to people with ID. A postal questionnaire was developed for this study and returned by 543 professionals working in 53 specialist palliative care services in London (57% response rate). Sixty-seven percent of respondents had supported a patient with ID at some point in their palliative care career. Problems arising from the patient’s difficulty in understanding the illness and treatment were reported as the most pertinent. Other prevalent problems included difficulty around communication, assessment and patient fear. Respondents emphasised the need for collaboration with carers and other services. Link worker schemes, training and access to background information were seen as most helpful. The authors conclude that palliative care services appear to be under-used by people with ID. There is a distinct set of problems related to the provision of palliative care for people with ID. Palliative care services should assess the nature and level of their service provision for people with ID. Future research should include epidemiological studies to assess need and include people with ID as informants to evaluate the effectiveness of palliative care provision.

A new model for breaking bad news to people with intellectual disabilities

Objectives: To develop a model for breaking bad news that meets the needs of people with intellectual disabilities (IDs). Design: A two-phase qualitative study featuring: (I) focus group meetings, on-line focus groups and one-to-one interviews; (II) structured feedback from participants and other stakeholders. Setting: Participants were drawn from National Health Service hospitals, Primary Care Trusts, independent organisations and on-line forums across England. Participants: 109 participants were purposively selected: 21 people with mild/moderate IDs, 28 family carers, 26 ID professionals and 34 general health professionals. Outcome measure: Feedback on a preliminary model for breaking bad news to people with IDs was collected from 60 participants and other stakeholders to assess relevance and acceptability, before the model was finalised. Results: Breaking bad news is best seen as a process, not an event or a linear series of events. Bad news situations usually constitute a wide range of discrete items or chunks of information. ‘Building a foundation of knowledge’ is central to the model. Information needs to be broken down into singular chunks of knowledge that can be added over time to people’s existing framework of knowledge. Three other aspects should be considered at all times: capacity, people and support. Conclusions: Patients who have IDs do not easily process verbal information in a clinical setting. The new model for breaking bad news to people with IDs needs to be tested in practice using robust outcome measures. The model’s relevance to wider patient groups should also be evaluated.

Disclosure and understanding of cancer diagnosis and prognosis for people with intellectual disabilities: Findings from an ethnographic study

PURPOSE Growing numbers of people with intellectual disabilities are diagnosed with a life-limiting illness such as cancer. Little is known about disclosure of diagnosis and prognosis to this group. The study aim was to explore how much people with intellectual disabilities who have cancer understand about their diagnosis and prognosis, and to explore how much they are told about their cancer. METHOD 13 people with intellectual disabilities and cancer took part in a 3-year ethnographic study. Data collection consisted mostly of participant observation. Participants were visited regularly for a median of 7 months. RESULTS Eleven participants were told that they had cancer, but most were not helped to understand the implications of this diagnosis or their prognosis. Decisions around disclosure, as well as the task of truth-telling, rested mostly with relatives and paid carers. Those with severe/profound intellectual disabilities were most likely to be protected from the truth. Understanding was affected by cognitive ability, life experience and truth-telling. Lack of understanding affected the ability to take decisions about treatment and care. CONCLUSIONS Existing models for breaking bad news are inadequate for people with intellectual disabilities. The findings suggest that more open communication is needed, but further studies are needed to establish best practice in this area.

The barriers to and enablers of providing reasonably adjusted health services to people with intellectual disabilities in acute hospitals: evidence from a mixed-methods study

Objective To identify the factors that promote and compromise the implementation of reasonably adjusted healthcare services for patients with intellectual disabilities in acute National Health Service (NHS) hospitals. Design A mixed-methods study involving interviews, questionnaires and participant observation (July 2011–March 2013). Setting Six acute NHS hospital trusts in England. Methods Reasonable adjustments for people with intellectual disabilities were identified through the literature. Data were collected on implementation and staff understanding of these adjustments. Results Data collected included staff questionnaires (n=990), staff interviews (n=68), interviews with adults with intellectual disabilities (n=33), questionnaires (n=88) and interviews (n=37) with carers of patients with intellectual disabilities, and expert panel discussions (n=42). Hospital strategies that supported implementation of reasonable adjustments did not reliably translate into consistent provision of such adjustments. Good practice often depended on the knowledge, understanding and flexibility of individual staff and teams, leading to the delivery of reasonable adjustments being haphazard throughout the organisation. Major barriers included: lack of effective systems for identifying and flagging patients with intellectual disabilities, lack of staff understanding of the reasonable adjustments that may be needed, lack of clear lines of responsibility and accountability for implementing reasonable adjustments, and lack of allocation of additional funding and resources. Key enablers were the Intellectual Disability Liaison Nurse and the ward manager. Conclusions The evidence suggests that ward culture, staff attitudes and staff knowledge are crucial in ensuring that hospital services are accessible to vulnerable patients. The authors suggest that flagging the need for specific reasonable adjustments, rather than the vulnerable condition itself, may address some of the barriers. Further research is recommended that describes and quantifies the most frequently needed reasonable adjustments within the hospital pathways of vulnerable patient groups, and the most effective organisational infrastructure required to guarantee their use, together with resource implications.

Palliative care provision for people with intellectual disabilities: interviews with specialist palliative care professionals in London:

Growing numbers of people with intellectual disabilities (ID) are in need of palliative care, but there is inequity of access to palliative care services for this group. This study investigates the issues and difficulties arising for palliative care staff in providing care for people with ID. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 32 palliative care professionals in London. Factors affecting palliative care provision for people with ID included social issues (home situation and family issues), emotional and cognitive issues (fear, patient understanding, communication, cooperation and capacity to consent), problems with assessment, and the impact on staff and other patients. An underlying theme was the need to take more time and to build trust. Despite the challenges, many palliative care staff managed the care of people with ID well. The importance of collaboration with carers and ID services is highlighted. Further studies are needed to investigate how widespread the problems are. Palliative Medicine 2007; 21 : 493—499

End-of-life decisions for people with intellectual disabilities, an interview study with patient representatives

Background: Not much is known about the process of end-of-life decision-making for people with intellectual disabilities. Aim: To clarify the process of end-of-life decision-making for people with intellectual disabilities from the perspective of patient representatives. Design: A qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews, recorded digitally and transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed using Grounded Theory procedures. Participants: We interviewed 16 patient representatives after the deaths of 10 people with intellectual disabilities in the Netherlands. Results: The core category ‘Deciding for someone else’ describes the context in which patient representatives took end-of-life decisions. The patient representatives felt highly responsible for the outcomes. They had not involved the patients in the end-of-life decision-making process, nor any professionals other than the doctor. The categories of ‘Motives’ and ‘Support’ were connected to the core category of ‘Deciding for someone else’. ‘Motives’ refers to the patient representatives’ ideas about quality of life, prevention from suffering, patients who cannot understand the burden of interventions and emotional reasons reported by patient representatives. ‘Support’ refers to the support that patient representatives wanted the doctors to give to them in the decision-making process. Conclusions: From the perspective of the patient representatives, the process of end-of-life decision-making can be improved by ensuring clear roles and an explicit description of the tasks and responsibilities of all participants. Regular discussion between everyone involved including people with intellectual disabilities themselves can improve knowledge about each other’s motives for end-of-decisions and can clarify expectations towards each other.

Defining consensus norms for palliative care of people with intellectual disabilities in Europe, using Delphi methods: A White Paper from the European Association of Palliative Care

Background: People with intellectual disabilities often present with unique challenges that make it more difficult to meet their palliative care needs. Aim: To define consensus norms for palliative care of people with intellectual disabilities in Europe. Design: Delphi study in four rounds: (1) a taskforce of 12 experts from seven European countries drafted the norms, based on available empirical knowledge and regional/national guidelines; (2) using an online survey, 34 experts from 18 European countries evaluated the draft norms, provided feedback and distributed the survey within their professional networks. Criteria for consensus were clearly defined; (3) modifications and recommendations were made by the taskforce; and (4) the European Association for Palliative Care reviewed and approved the final version. Setting and participants: Taskforce members: identified through international networking strategies. Expert panel: a purposive sample identified through taskforce members’ networks. Results: A total of 80 experts from 15 European countries evaluated 52 items within the following 13 norms: equity of access, communication, recognising the need for palliative care, assessment of total needs, symptom management, end-of-life decision making, involving those who matter, collaboration, support for family/carers, preparing for death, bereavement support, education/training and developing/managing services. None of the items scored less than 86% agreement, making a further round unnecessary. In light of respondents’ comments, several items were modified and one item was deleted. Conclusion: This White Paper presents the first guidance for clinical practice, policy and research related to palliative care for people with intellectual disabilities based on evidence and European consensus, setting a benchmark for changes in policy and practice.