Hospice Final Report

DEVELOP, TRIAL AND EVALUATE A
MODEL OF MULTI-DISCIPLINARY
PALLIATIVE CARE FOR RESIDENTS
WITH END-STAGE DEMENTIA
CHIEF INVESTIGATOR
Professor Jenny Abbey
CO-INVESTIGATORS
Dr Carol Douglas
Prof Helen Edwards
Prof Mary Courtney
Dr Deborah Parker
Prof Patsy Yates
REPORT AUTHORS
Professor Jenny Abbey
Dr Sandy Sacre
Ms Jenneke Foottit
Dr Deborah Parker
Funded by The Prince Charles Hospital Foundation 2005
FINAL REPORT FEBRUARY 2008
-1
©Queensland University of Technology
©Queensland Health
Abbey, J., Douglas, D., Edwards, H., Courtney, M., Parker, D., Yates, P. (2008).
Develop, trial and evaluate a model of multi-disciplinary palliative care for
residents with end-stage dementia.
February 2008
Correspondence: Professor Jenny Abbey, Professor of Nursing (Aged Care) |

Director QUT Dementia Collaborative Research Centre - Consumers, Carers &
Social Research
Queensland University of Technology 148 Victoria Park Road, Kelvin Grove
QLD 4059 Australia
-2
PROJECT TEAM
Professor Jennifer Abbey RN, BN, PhD

Chief Investigator, Professor of Nursing (Aged Care)
Queensland University of Technology and The
Prince Charles Hospital
Dr Carol Douglas MB., Ch.B, Grad Dip Family Medicine,

Grad Dip Palliative Medicine, FRACGP 2000
FAChPM
Director of Palliative Care
Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital
Professor Helen Edwards DipAppSc., BA(Hons), PhD, RN, FRCNA

Head, School of Nursing
Professor of Nursing
Professor Mary Courtney BAdmin (Accounting), MHP, PhD, FRCNA,

AFCHSE
Professor of Nursing, School of Nursing
Assistant Dean (Research), Faculty of Health
Dr. Deborah Parker BA, M Soc Sci, PhD

Co-Investigator, Senior Research Fellow, (formally
Dementia Collaborative Research Centre,
Queensland University of Technology)
Prof Patsy Yates RN, BA, DipAppSci, MSocSc, PhD

Professor, Director of Research - Nursing,
A/Director, Centre for Palliative Care Research and
Education, Qld Health, Subject Area Coordinator,
Cancer Nursing QUT
Ms Jenneke Foottit RN (General & Mental Health)

HonsB.SocSc(Nursing), M.Soc.Sc (past.
counselling).
Senior Research Assistant
Dementia Collaborative Research Centre,
Queensland University of Technology
Dr. Sandy Sacre RN, B Soc Sci (Psych), B Psych (Hons), PhD
Co-Investigator, Senior Research Fellow, Dementia
Collaborative Research Centre, Queensland
University of Technology
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The study has been funded by the Prince Charles Hospital Foundation and was
undertaken in two residential aged care facilities (RACFs), located in Brisbane,
Queensland. We would like to extend our sincere thanks to the staff and families
involved in the research.
-3
ABBREVIATIONS
Alzheimer’s Disease (AD)
As Required (PRN)
Assistant in Nursing (AIN)
Enrolled Nurse (EN)
General Practitioners (GPs)
multidisciplinary model of palliative care (mmpc)
Palliative Care Nurses Quiz (PCQN)
Registered Nurse (RN)
Residential Aged Care Facilities (RACFs)
SWC-EOLD – Satisfaction with Care at the End-of-Life in Dementia
SM-EOLD – Symptom Management at the End-of-Life in Dementia
-4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...........................................................................................3
ABBREVIATIONS ......................................................................................................4
TABLES AND FIGURES ...........................................................................................7
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .........................................................................................8
MAIN FINDINGS ..........................................................................................................9
Phase one: Understanding the quality of the end-of-life experience for residents
and families prior to the introduction of a multidisciplinary model of palliative
care (mmpc) ...........................................................................................................9
Phase two: Provision of an education program for staff and general
practitioners on the principles of a palliative approach .....................................10
Phase three: Development, trial and evaluation of a model of multi-disciplinary
palliative care for residents with end-stage dementia .........................................11
CONCLUSIONS ...........................................................................................................12
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF A MULTIDISCIPLINARY MODEL OF
PALLIATIVE CARE FOR RESIDENTS WITH END-STAGE DEMENTIA:...............................13
STUDY REPORT ......................................................................................................14

BACKGROUND INFORMATION .........................................................................14
WHAT IS PALLIATIVE CARE FOR OLDER PEOPLE?.....................................................14
DEATH AS A MANAGED PROCESS..............................................................................15
PLANNING FOR LIVING AND PLANNING FOR DYING ..................................................16
AIMS OF THE PROJECT .......................................................................................17
STUDY DESIGN........................................................................................................18
ETHICAL APPROVAL ..................................................................................................18
PHASE ONE............................................................................................................18
Resident case note audit.......................................................................................18
Carer interviews...................................................................................................18
PHASE TWO ...........................................................................................................19
Staff Education.....................................................................................................19
Knowledge of a Palliative Approach ...................................................................20
PHASE THREE: ......................................................................................................21
RESULTS ...................................................................................................................25
PHASE ONE............................................................................................................25
Case Note Audits – prior to the mmpc .................................................................25
Case Note Audits – following the mmpc ..............................................................26
Comparisons of Case Note Audits .......................................................................27
The SWC-EOLD – prior to the mmpc ..................................................................27
The SWC-EOLD – following the mmpc ...............................................................28
Comparisons of the SWC-EOLD prior to and following the introduction of the
mmpc ....................................................................................................................29
Interviews with Bereaved Carers prior to the mmpc ...........................................31
PHASE TWO ...........................................................................................................42
Education sessions ...............................................................................................42
-5
Staff Pre mmpc Questionnaire Results ................................................................42
Staff Post mmpc Questionnaire Results ...............................................................45
PHASE THREE .......................................................................................................50
A profile of residents who participated in the mmpc ...........................................50
Resident profiles...................................................................................................57
Case conference: an example .............................................................................58
Interviews with Bereaved Carers following the introduction of the mmpc .........59
Impact of the mmpc for general practitioners .....................................................62
Impact of the mmpc on residential staff...............................................................62
DISCUSSION .............................................................................................................64
CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................65
APPENDIX 1 – THE SYMPTOM MANAGEMENT AT THE END-OF-LIFE DEMENTIA SCALE
..................................................................................................................................65
APPENDIX 2 – THE SATISFACTION WITH CARE AT THE END-OF-LIFE DEMENTIA
SCALE .......................................................................................................................67
APPENDIX 3 – MMPC PRO FORMA ..............................................................................68
APPENDIX 4 – ASSESSMENT OF RESIDENTS’ CARE .....................................................73
APPENDIX 5 - PRELIMINARY CODES FOR INTERVIEWS ..............................................82
APPENDIX 6 - PRE – INTERVENTION RESPONSES TO NON PCQN QUESTIONS BY
PROFESSIONAL GROUP ...............................................................................................83
APPENDIX 7 —PRE – INTERVENTION RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS FROM THE PCQN BY
APPENDIX 8 POST – INTERVENTION RESPONSES TO NON PCQN QUESTIONS BY
APPENDIX 10 – POLICY FOR A PALLIATIVE CARE APPROACH ...................................91
APPENDIX 11 – PALLIATIVE CARE PLAN ...................................................................92
APPENDIX 12 – WORK INSTRUCTION FOR A PALLIATIVE APPROACH .........................98
APPENDIX 13 – PALLIATIVE CARE PROCEDURE FLOWCHART AND AUDIT TOOL.......99
REFERENCES.........................................................................................................102
-6
TABLES AND FIGURES
Figure 1- The SM-EOLD Scale for residents who died prior to the introduction of the
mmpc............................................................................................................................25
Figure 2 - The SM-EOLD Scale for residents who died following the introduction of
the mmpc......................................................................................................................26
Table 1 - The SM-EOLD for residents prior to and following the introduction of the
mmpc............................................................................................................................27
Table 2 - The SWC – EOLD Scale prior to the introduction of the mmpc .................28
Table 3 - The SWC- EOLD Scale following the introduction of the mmpc ...............29
Figure 3 - The SWC-EOLD Scale prior to and following the introduction of the mmpc
......................................................................................................................................30
Table 4 - Responses to psychosocial questions pre mmpc ..........................................42
Table 5 - Responses to organisational questions pre mmpc ........................................43
Table 6 – Responses to clinical management questions pre mmpc .............................44
Table 7 - Responses to PCQN questions prior to the mmpc........................................45
Table 8 – Responses to psychosocial questions post mmpc ........................................46
Table 9 – Responses to organisational questions post mmpc ......................................47
Table 10 – Responses to clinical management questions post mmpc .........................48
Table 11 - Responses to the PCQN questions post mmpc...........................................49
Figure 4 - Correct responses to the PCQN questions prior to and following the
introduction of the mmpc.............................................................................................49
Table 12 - Average length of stay for study residents in the facility prior to the mmpc
......................................................................................................................................50
Table 13 – Residents’ Classification Category............................................................51
Table 14 - Palliative Care Casemix Classification Definitions ...................................51
Table 15 - Hydration status for study residents at initial assessment ..........................51
Table 16 - Nutrition status for study residents at initial assessment............................52
Table 17 - Behavioural problems for study residents at initial assessment .................52
Table 18 - Skin integrity for study residents at initial assessment...............................52
Table 19 – Symptoms for residents at initial assessment ............................................53
Figure 5 - Percentage of residents with symptoms at initial assessment .....................54
Table 20 - Percentage of residents with symptoms during the study ..........................55
Figure 6 - Percentage of residents with symptoms during the study ...........................55
Table 21 - Regular medications for study residents.....................................................56
Table 22 - PRN medications for study residents .........................................................56
Table 23 - Regular opioids prescribed for study residents during the study ...............57
-7
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The rapid growth of the older segment of Australia’s population and the corresponding
effect on the increase in the expected growth in numbers of people with dementia will be
of great concern in the next two decades. In 1976, one in six older people (those 65 and
above) was aged 80 and over; by 1999 it was one in five; by 2016 it is projected to be one
in four; and by 2041 one in three older people will be over 80 years. The proportion of
older people who require care in a Residential Aged Care Facility (RACF), at this time is
approximately 8% (Commonwealth of Australia 2003). However, projections of the
increase in the number of people over 80 years of age make it likely that this figure will
increase exponentially.
In 2005, there were 161, 765 residential aged care places available in Australia. Death is
the likely exit point for most people who enter a residential aged care facility with 84% of
separations in 2005 accounted for by the residents’ death (Australian Institute of Health
and Welfare (AIHW) 2006). Since the introduction of the new aged care reforms of 1997-
8, there is a responsibility for aged-care staff to document and manage the death of those
in their care in a systematic, planned fashion. When there is a clear prognosis and an
understood trajectory towards death as is often the case with cancer, death can often be,
perhaps usually, a straightforward, well-planned and managed process. However, for
people with chronic conditions and a long drawn out deterioration of health before death a
framework different to that derived from acute palliative-care service models, is needed, a
framework that can be organised, planned and executed mainly by nurses, after due
consultation and with the support and collaboration of other health professionals. A best
practice approach could be one that involves an interdisciplinary team using case
conferences which include the client's relatives and friends, education for staff and
supportive management structures (Froggatt, Poole et al. 2002)
In Australia the need for a structured palliative approach in residential aged care facilities
has previously been identified (Abbey 2003; Parker, Grbich et al. 2005) and a
commitment by the Australian government to develop guidelines for a palliative approach
is evidence of this need (Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing 2004). At the
time of this present study, while these guidelines were available, the national
implementation strategy for the guidelines had not been commenced.
This study aimed to develop a structured model of multi-disciplinary palliative care

(mmpc) for people with end-stage dementia. The mmpc was based on the Guidelines for a
Palliative Approach in Residential Aged Care (2004). This model was then trialled and
evaluated in two RACFs in Australia during 2005.
This study utilised a multi-method approach and included both retrospective and
prospective data collection and analysis. The study was conducted in three phases over a
14 month period during 2004 -2005, consisting of:
Phase 1. Understanding the quality of the end-of-life experience for residents and
families prior to the introduction of a multidisciplinary model of palliative care.
Phase 2. Provision of an education program for staff and general practitioners on

the principles of a palliative approach.
-8
Phase 3. Development, trial and evaluation of a model of multi-disciplinary
palliative care for residents with end-stage dementia
Main Findings
The main findings will be summarized in point form under the three phases of the study.
Readers are encouraged to refer to the relevant sections of the report for further details.
Phase one: Understanding the quality of the end-of-life experience for

residents and families prior to the introduction of a multidisciplinary
model of palliative care (mmpc)
This was achieved in two ways: a case note audit of twenty five residents with end-stage
dementia who died in the two RACFs during 2004; and interviews with carers of these
residents to determine their perceptions of care provided.
Main findings from this phase:
• The routine use of case conferencing to discuss a palliative approach for residents
with end-stage dementia was limited
• The use of advance health directives for residents was minimal.
• Documentation of the recognition of a palliative phase to care was evident but this
mainly occurred a few days prior to death indicating the recognition of terminal care
rather than a palliative approach.
• Common symptoms in the 90 days prior to death were agitation, resistance to care,
pain and skin breakdown.
• Carers were overall satisfied with their opportunity to make decisions regarding
their relative’s care, the level of comfort of their relative, the sensitivity shown to
them as carers and with the nursing care and treatments provided. Their main
concerns were not having enough understanding of who was coordinating care, not
having enough information about how medication was managed and how medical
decisions were made.
• Reports from carers regarding whether they were aware that their relative was
deteriorating and expected to die varied, with some indicating they knew and were
told, and others being unaware of how close death might be.
• Comments were predominately expressions of dissatisfaction around
o The lack of time available to staff to spend with their relatives or other
residents.
o The loss of identity of their relative as communication became impaired.
o Lack of information about the trajectory of dementia.
o Limited opportunity for emotional support from staff.
• Issues about lack of privacy were raised particularly for those who were either not in
a single room or where no private room was available for terminal care.
• Discussion with carers on whether to stop or withhold treatment was an issue raised
and mainly concerned the use of antibiotics.
• Carers spoke of the impact of caring for a relative with dementia over many years,
often without any recognition and therefore not having much positive reward for
their care.
-9
• Carers also identified the loss they felt and the need for an adjustment in terms of
what to do with the time they now had available which had previously been spent at
the facility.
Phase two: Provision of an education program for staff and general

practitioners on the principles of a palliative approach
Face-to-face lectures, CD-ROM lectures, provision of a copy of the guidelines to each

section of the two RACFs and the provision of relevant literature. General practitioners
who attended the RACFs on a regular basis were invited to sessions, sent a CD-ROM of
the training sessions and an electronic copy of the guidelines.
Change in knowledge and attitudes of nursing staff to providing a palliative approach was
measured with a questionnaire administered prior to the education and at the completion
of the mmpc. No formal assessment of general practitioner knowledge was undertaken.

• Undertaking a second questionnaire with nursing staff proved to be difficult. The
nurse unit managers were supportive and went to great lengths to encourage staff to
complete the questionnaires, but high staff turnover in one facility, a building
program that affected the units where people with dementia were mainly cared for,
and changes in management teams and structures probably had an impact on the
completion of post mmpc questionnaires. The overall response rate for the pre-test
was 59%. And for the post-test was 15.8%.
• In the post mmpc round, fewer registered nurses (14.3% vs. 32%), more enrolled
nurses (23.8% vs. 16%) and more assistants in nursing (61.9% vs. 52%) completed
and returned questionnaires. While these differences are not statistically significant,
they may have impacted on the reliability of the results.
• The low post-mmpc response rate compared with the pre-mmpc response rate may
have meant that follow-up results were not representative of the broad group of staff.
• Nevertheless, there were statistically significant differences in staff responses to
some questions pre- and post-mmpc. There were significant positive changes in staff
belief that they could reflect on what could have been done to improve care and staff
felt that their clinical management skills had increased.
• There were some results in a negative direction including:
o Staff confidence in discussing impending death with families
o Perceptions that the clinical team did not work together with the family
o Belief that pain was not well managed
o Discomfort in speaking with GPs about residents’ symptoms.
Some of these differences may be due to the differences in sample size and
education level of staff completing the pre and post questionnaires. For example,
these results may have resulted from a higher proportion of assistants in nursing
than registered nurses completing the follow-up survey. However, another
explanation is that having been exposed to information and education about how to
improve palliative care, staff may have become more aware of their skills deficits
and lack of confidence in terms of applying these new skills.
- 10
Phase three: Development, trial and evaluation of a model of multi-
disciplinary palliative care for residents with end-stage dementia
In the final phase a model of multidisciplinary palliative care based on the palliative
approach guidelines (Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing 2004) was
developed. This model included education of staff as previously described,
multidisciplinary case conferencing using the enhanced primary care guidelines and
implementation of palliative goals. Ongoing liaison between specialist palliative care
services, residents, relatives, staff of the RACFs and the resident’s general practitioner
was also available.
This model was trialled for a period of approximately 10 months during which time
seventeen residents of those identified by staff as requiring a palliative approach were
suitable for inclusion in the study. Of these residents, nine died during the trial of the
mmpc. It was originally envisaged that comparisons would be possible between the
experiences of the twenty five deceased residents and their bereaved carers who were
included in the retrospective study, and a sample of twenty five residents and bereaved
carers after the introduction of the mmpc. Unfortunately recruitment difficulties and
financial constraints limited the comparison group to seventeen residents and most
specifically the nine who died during the mmpc.
• All residents were highly dependent for activities of daily living and more than
half were reported as having severe difficulties understanding the need for care
measures. These difficulties are sometimes documented as ‘resisting care’ or
‘resistive to care’, indicating that the person uses non-verbal methods of saying
‘no’, sometimes perceived as inappropriately (for example when the resident is
incontinent and staff would prefer to change the clothes and bed linen and the
person prefers them not to).
• Most common symptoms were weakness/fatigue, dysphagia, anorexia,
pruritis/rashes, restlessness, anxiety, anorexia and vomiting.
• For the nine residents who died, symptoms in the 90 days prior to death included
pain, ‘resistance to care’ indicating severe communication difficulties, skin
breakdown, agitation and shortness of breath. The frequency of recording of those
symptoms for the nine residents after the introduction of mmpc was greater than
for the twenty five residents prior to the mmpc. It appears that the education on
the importance of documentation of symptoms had made staff more aware of the
need to document troublesome symptoms.
• Multidisciplinary case conferencing provided opportunity for discussion of
important palliative issues such as pain and symptom management, management
of loss of the ability to swallow, discussion of the resident’s wishes if known
regarding death and dying, and any family concerns.
• In both groups issues of nutrition and hydration were discussed. This occurred in
the multidisciplinary case conference after the introduction of mmpc, but for the
pre mmpc group this was often done informally and therefore may not have been
documented.
• Overall carer satisfaction ratings using the Satisfaction with End-of-Life Care
scale (SW-EOLD) were generally high both pre mmpc (mean 30.7, standard
- 11
deviation 4.6) and post mmpc (mean 31, standard deviation 3.8) indicating little
change between the two groups in terms of satisfaction with care overall, but
when examining individual questions the carers in the post mmpc group had
higher satisfaction ratings on four of the ten questions, although none reached
statistical significance.
o More carers post mmpc believed they had been given enough information
to make decisions and remained comfortable with the decisions they had
made.
o More carers post mmpc agreed that all measures were taken to keep the
resident comfortable.
o More carers post mmpc indicated they were given enough information to
understand that the person was approaching the end stage of their disease
and by implication, the end of their life.
o More carers post mmpc indicate satisfaction with the medical care
provided.
• Interviews with bereaved carers post mmpc indicated a high level of satisfaction
with the care their relative received.
• While experiences of bereaved carers prior to the mmpc indicated some concern
with privacy, late recognition of the need for a palliative approach or even
impending death, these issues were not raised by carers in the post mmpc group.
• All residents in the study were receiving multiple medications with twelve of the
seventeen residents on opioid analgesics and pain control was generally
satisfactory overall for the post mmpc group.
• One carer however, identified that she did not think her husband was given
adequate pain relief in the few hours prior to death and she perceived this was
reluctance from the registered nurse related to ‘giving the final dose of morphine’.
This issue highlighted the ongoing need for education and culture change required
to implement a palliative approach in RACFs.
• Staff provided positive feedback on the implementation of the mmpc in their
RACFs. This included raising awareness of the need for a palliative approach for
residents with dementia, opportunity to discuss palliative issues with other team
members and relatives at multidisciplinary case conferences and increased
interaction with carers regarding palliative care issues that had been discussed at
the mmpc case conference.
• While general practitioner involvement in the study was limited positive
reflections from those involved regarding the use of case conferencing indicated
the viability of using multidisciplinary case conferencing as a tool for
implementing a structured palliative approach for residents who would benefit
from it.
Conclusions
This study illustrated the positive contribution of providing a structured multidisciplinary

palliative approach for residents with end-stage dementia. While further evaluation of this
model is required the commitment of staff to the development of a palliative approach
policy and appropriate documentation is encouraging.
- 12
Recommendations for implementation of a multidisciplinary model of palliative care
for residents with end-stage dementia:
1. A multidisciplinary model of palliative care for people in the late-stages of

dementia is a best practice approach
2. An education program for staff is required within RACFs to become skilled in

facilitating an mmpc and case conferencing.
3. Continued education for all levels of staff based on the palliative care guidelines
will be needed
4. Provision within RACFs for staff to discuss the care provided to residents who
have died including what was done well and what could have been improved
assists in continuing improvement
5. The documentation for the mmpc and palliative care case conferencing developed
in this research be further validated and trialled
6. RACFs to undertake regular audits of palliative and end-of-life care to identify

practices that require improvement in addition to those which are providing desired
outcomes.
- 13
STUDY REPORT
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Dementia is described in medical terms as: ‘A syndrome due to disease of the brain,
usually of chronic or progressive nature, in which there is disturbance of multiple higher
cortical functions, including memory, thinking, orientation, comprehension, calculation,
learning capacity, language and judgment. Consciousness is not clouded. Impairments of
cognitive function are commonly accompanied by and occasionally preceded by
deteriorating emotional control, social behaviour or motivation. This syndrome occurs in
Alzheimer's disease, in cerebrovascular disease, and in other conditions primarily or
secondarily affecting the brain’ (Jorm and Henderson 1993).
Some general groups of symptoms and behaviours have been identified that can signify
the end-stage of dementia (Shuster 2000; Abbey 2003):
• there is often a progressive worsening of memory resulting in increased confusion

and disorientation
• speech and the ability to communicate often deteriorate to the point where the
person may eventually become incoherent or completely mute
• behavioural changes may occur which can lead to a person being belligerent,
sobbing or screaming; or strikingly passive and quiet, immobile and detached
• the person’s ability or desire to move independently can decline, leaving them
bed/chair bound
• the person’s capacity for self-care progressively diminishes, making them totally
dependent on carers
• the person’s ability to eat independently gradually disappears, often associated
with a diminished ability to swallow and increased risk of aspiration. A
progressive loss of appetite almost always follows
• other complications can include bowel and bladder incontinence, muscle atrophy
and contractures, increased susceptibility to delirium, recurrent infections,
pneumonia, pain, peripheral shutdown, pressure ulcers and general skin breakdown
• delirium can result in increased restlessness and agitation
The appearance and prominence of these symptoms will vary between individuals due to
differing disease processes, individual differences and co-existing conditions such as
cardiac failure, diabetes and cancer. Volicer (2002) indicated that these progressive
changes in functioning mark end-stage Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) and present challenges
to carers to define positive approaches to care to ensure the individual’s quality of life.
What is Palliative Care for Older People?
Palliative care is defined by the World Health Organisation (and others) as the total care
of people whose disease is not responsive to curative treatment and includes control of
symptoms, in particular pain, and care of the family of the dying person (Davies 2004). A
report in 2004 by the World Health Organisation (Davies, J et al. 2004) examining the
needs for palliative care in older people, suggested that older people have special needs
related to multiple medical problems of varying severity, the cumulative effect of which
my be greater than any one disease and therefore causing greater impairment and care
needs. Their research showed that cognitive impairment was a common occurrence in the
- 14
last year of older adults’ lives, along with continence issues and sensory losses. Their
suggestion was for a palliative approach to be based on the need of the person and the
family rather than prognosis (Davies, J et al. 2004), given the difficulty in predicting the
course of chronic illness. A related report (Davies 2004) found that the unmet palliative
care needs of older people and their families include pain management, issues of non-
cancer illnesses including heart failure and dementia, multiple problems related to ageing,
communication and patient-centred care, and preferences for place of care and place of
death. Implied in the report was the need for excellent symptom control and being able to
remain in the place of residence until death.
There are many debates about futile treatment (Shah and Lloyd-Williams 2003) and Barr,
Graham and Ireland (2002) argued that many older people want a choice of palliative care.
The kind of assistance which older people, their family and their friends require will need
to be individualised. However, all would probably feel vulnerable and/or confused. Older
people often felt powerless in the hands of health professionals (Cameron 2002)and felt
conflict about their increasing dependence on health professionals. One of the participants
in Cameron’s study expressed it as follows:
‘How do you tell a doctor that you think he was wrong?’ a woman asked. ‘I am afraid of
offending him, and I really need him. I don't want him to be cross with me or think I am
critical of his care.’ (p544)
Cameron (2002)’s research found that older adults needed effective resolution of ethical
conflict related to making decisions in order to find meaning in suffering, harmony in
unpredictability and less fear of death. Participants indicated that effective resolution of
ethical conflicts helped them to live with meaning and integrity and ‘failure to resolve
conflict in this way led to stress, compromised integrity, and decreased quality of life’
(p545). From this it follows that health professionals need to become skilled in promoting
open and easy dialogue about difficult issues with attention to listening and supporting.
This would allow for the development of a plan of care that is recognised and accepted as
suitable by the person who is dying or their legitimate representatives.
Death as a Managed Process
Since the introduction of the new aged care reforms of 1997-8, there is a responsibility for
aged-care staff to document and manage the death of those in their care in a systematic,
planned fashion. When there is a clear prognosis and understood trajectory towards death
as is often the case with cancer, death can often be, perhaps usually, a straightforward,
well-planned and managed process. The sick person will usually be aware of their choices
and fully able to make them. Families can interrupt their own lives and rally round the
person who is dying, with the communication being of obvious benefit to both parties.
However, if death does not come gently and predictably as is often the case with long-
term chronic illnesses such as emphysema and dementia, the dying person, families,
carers, doctors and nurses often come face to face with their values, hopes and limitations
in a more complex, untidy and stressful process.
It is this confrontation with limitations and choices that underpins a discussion of

palliative care for older people. An interdisciplinary approach using case conferences
which include the client's friends and relatives, education for staff and supportive
management structures has been advocated (Froggatt, Poole et al. 2002). The framework
around which to build policies for palliative care for older people needs to be based on
- 15
more than emotional responses, historical practice or anecdotal evidence that says 'we do
it anyway', without clarification of the issues. Planning for death needs to be a systematic
process, with a well-defined purpose and a structure which is contextualised to suit the
population in care, the carers themselves and the culture in which this care takes place.
Planning for Living and Planning for Dying
The indicators for the introduction of a palliative approach for those with cognitive
impairment are more complex than for those who could indicate their wishes for care,
compounded by a lack of research on what would trigger a move towards a palliative
approach for older people. The nurse’s knowledge of and relationship with, the older
person and his or her family and friends is vitally important. The previously expressed
wishes of the individual and the present concerns of family and friends are paramount.
Covinsky (2003) undertook a study to characterize the functional trajectories during the
last two years of life of people with progressive frailty and found that for people with and
without cognitive impairment there was a prolonged, steady increase in functional
dependence evident at least one year before death. There were no incidents or abrupt
decline in function which signal impending death. To differentiate the client's needs takes
skill and an intimate relationship (Maynard, Whittle et al. 2003). The greatest
apprehension of people in a study on end-of-life preferences among older people is that
they will not experience a peaceful, pain-free, dignified death(Nahm and Resnick 2001).
Offering a model of care that provides palliation has been shown to improve quality of life
and meet the expectations of persons with dementia and their families as well as
containing some of the cost associated with end stage care (Billings 1998). However,
education is needed to prepare staff for this difficult work.
An Australian study (Doyle and Ward 1998) found that dementia care training is usually
not linked to competency standards or staff appraisal, and the emphasis on dementia care
in generalist education institutions varies considerably. Shanley, McDowell & Wynne
(1998) evaluated a short course on caring for people with dementia and found that a
course based on interactive teaching, with follow-up and an action plan included, had
positive outcomes for dementia care. A Swedish study (Skog, Grafstrom et al. 1999)
found that education changed the outlook of a group of trainees from seeing people with
dementia as a homogeneous group to seeing them as unique human beings.
A group of nurses and physicians, led by Ladislav Volicer, has been writing about the
introduction of forms of palliative care for people with dementia for the past two decades.
Their evidence, ranging from 1986 to 2003 (Volicer, Brown et al. 1986; Volicer, Seltzer et
al. 1989; Volicer, Hurley et al. 1993; Volicer, Collard et al. 1994; Volicer 1997; Volicer,
Hurley et al. 2001; Volicer, McKee et al. 2001; Volicer 2002; Volicer and Hurley 2003)
emphasises that, in the end-stage of dementia, comfort care, delivered by knowledgeable,
educated staff is the paramount objective.
Also important is Molloy’s evidence showing the usefulness of advance directives in

RACFs (Molloy and Guyatt 1991; Molloy and Urbanyi 1992; Molloy, Guyatt et al. 2000).
Molloy confirms results such as those from Akerlund and Norberg (1990) which
demonstrate that staff personalities, beliefs and individual values have the most significant
effect on care that is supplied to the residents, reinforcing the need for educated staff and
clear formal protocols if care is to be consistent.
- 16
In Australia, Hudson and Richmond (1994; 2001) describe a palliative approach to be
used in RACFs and supply examples of documentation which can be used by nurses.
Hudson and Richmond supply exemplars from their work in RACFs, based on their
background as palliative care nurses, and offer suggestions for an effective palliative
approach which arose from what had worked in clinical practice. However, there is no
evidence that these suggestions were incorporated into practice in other RACFs
In a study by the Chief Investigator (Abbey 1995) questions were raised about the benefit
of life-sustaining procedures applied without the benefit of a coherent policy and ethical
framework, and which depended on the values and personalities of staff rather than agreed
protocols. A report in which the Chief Investigator was heavily involved, ‘Palliative care
in Nursing Homes’, was furnished to the Commonwealth Government (Maddocks, Abbey
et al. 1996), followed by the production of an education package outlining techniques to
introduce palliative care into nursing homes. Funding was not available at the time to
evaluate the use of this education package. More recent work by Maddocks et al (1999)
demonstrated that training of staff within RACFs can improve knowledge, skills and
attitudes in caring for people with life limiting illnesses.
The recognition by the Australian Government of the need for a national approach to
providing palliation for residents in RACFs led to the development of Guidelines for a
Palliative Approach in Residential Aged Care Facilities (Commonwealth Department of
Health and Ageing 2004). These guidelines highlighted that to provide effective and
humane clinical care for residents with end-stage dementia a structured approach would
be required.
This particular study sought to develop, trial and evaluate a structured model of multi-
disciplinary palliative care (mmpc) in two RACFs in Australia.
AIMS OF THE PROJECT
For a population of residents diagnosed as being in the end-stage (terminal) of a

dementing illness in two residential aged care facilities:
1. To develop, trial and evaluate a structured model of multi-disciplinary palliative

care (mmpc)
2. To evaluate the quality of the end-of-life experience before and after the
introduction of the mmpc
3. To evaluate the palliative care knowledge and attitudes of staff and GPs
concerning people with end-stage dementia before and after the introduction of the
mmpc.
- 17
STUDY DESIGN
This study took a multi-method approach and included both retrospective and prospective
data collection and analysis. The study was conducted in three phases over a 14 month
period. These phases consisted of:
Phase 1. Understanding the quality of the end-of-life experience for residents and
families prior to the introduction of a multidisciplinary model of palliative care.
Phase 2. Provision of an education program for staff and general practitioners on

the principles of a palliative approach.
Phase 3. Development, trial and evaluation of a model of multi-disciplinary

palliative care for residents with end-stage dementia
Ethical approval
Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the Queensland University of
Technology Human Ethics Committee and the Prince Charles Hospital Health Service
District Ethics Committee.
PHASE ONE
This phase of the study aimed to collect baseline information on the care provided to
residents with end-stage dementia in the two RACFs and their families prior to the
introduction of the mmpc. This information was provided by a case note audit of residents
that had a diagnosis of dementia and who had died in the two facilities during the year
2004. In addition, the closest living relative/lawfully authorised representative of the
person who died was interviewed regarding their perceptions of care that had been
provided.
Details of the data collected in this phase include:
Resident case note audit
• Between October 2004 and January 2005 the research team undertook a retrospective
audit of case notes recording details of symptom control and clinical management in
the last 90 days of the life of 25 residents with a diagnosis of dementia who died in
either of the two RACFs during the year 2004. A scale designed by researchers to
capture this, ‘Symptom Management at the End-of-Life in Dementia (SM-EOLD)’
(Volicer, Hurley et al. 2001) was used to record findings (Appendix 1).
Carer interviews
• The research team interviewed relatives/lawfully authorised representative(s) of the

25 residents whose care was audited using the SM-EOLD. The quality of the end-of-
life experience was measured using the scale ‘Satisfaction with Care at the End-of-
Life in Dementia (SWC-EOLD)’ (Volicer, Hurley et al. 2001) (Appendix 2). The
SWC-EOLD evaluates the satisfaction of the family members with the process of pre-
death care, including not only the care provided to the resident but also that provided
- 18
to the family and significant others. Interviews were taped, transcribed and analysed
thematically.
PHASE TWO
This phase of the project which overlapped with Phase One included the provision of a
comprehensive education program on the principles of a palliative approach for nursing
staff of all designated levels at the two facilities. To allow maximum flexibility education
sessions were delivered in each section of the two residential aged care facilities and at a
time most convenient for nursing staff to attend. Due to the amount of information that
was considered important for nursing staff to understand a palliative approach, four
education sessions over a period of one to two months were scheduled. Details of this
phase include:
Staff Education
The education program was based on the Guidelines for A Palliative Approach in
Residential Aged Care Facilities (Commonwealth of Australia 2003). Education provided
included:
• A series of four face-to-face in-service lectures and activities for nursing staff at
each RACF
• in one facility sessions on each ward were held at change of shift between the
afternoon and night shift, repeating the content of the lectures for those unable to
attend daytime sessions
• provision of lectures on a CD-ROM for nursing staff unable to attend a face-to-face
lecture
• supply to General Practitioners of a CD-ROM of the guidelines produced by the
Commonwealth Dept of Health and Ageing, A Palliative Approach to Residential
Aged Care Facilities (Commonwealth of Australia 2003). GPs were also invited to
attend in-service lectures scheduled for RACF staff.
• distribution to all staff of educational literature outlining, among other things, the
evidence base being used for the model of multi-disciplinary palliative care
Topics:
Session 1
• The palliative approach
• End-of-life (terminal care)
• Denying death
• Attitude, knowledge, skills and process in relation to dignity and quality of life
Session 2
• Physical symptom assessment and management
o Dysphagia
o Nutrition and hydration
o Weight loss
- 19
o Bowel care
o Skin integrity
o Fatigue
o Pain
Session 3
• End-of-life (terminal) care
• ‘I don’t know what to say’ – awkward questions
• Medication management
• Death rattle
• Nausea and vomiting
• Suction
• Signs of death
• Bereavement support for the family
Session 4
• A structured approach – how do we put it together?
• Documenting observations
• Documenting residents needs
• Documenting relative’s needs
• Writing care plans
• Case conferencing
Knowledge of a Palliative Approach
To gauge a change in knowledge of and attitude to the provision of a palliative approach,

nursing staff were asked to complete a questionnaire prior to the education sessions
(October 2004 – January 2005) and then again at the completion of the trial of the mmpc
(November 2005).
A questionnaire from a study on palliative care nurse practitioners in RACFs was used
with permission (Maddocks, Parker et al. 1999). The questionnaire consists of 17 items
adapted from the Palliative Care Quiz (PCQN) {Ross, 1996 #91}and 25 questions
developed by Maddocks et al (1999). All items had fixed responses; the responses to the
17 items from the PCQN were true or false and the other 25 items which addressed
attitudes and perceived confidence with providing a palliative approach had responses of
yes, no or sometimes. The research team scored the questionnaires.
Questionnaires were distributed by the research team and nursing staff were asked to
complete the questionnaires and place them in a box in the area they worked in. Responses
from the questionnaires were entered into an SPSS version 13.0 data file.
Whilst nursing staff were encouraged to complete the questionnaire at both time points
(pre and post mmpc), the movement of staff through facilities made it more likely that
only a small percentage of staff would have completed both pre and post mmpc
questionnaires. The data were therefore analysed with statistical methods for independent
groups. The results need to be interpreted with caution, because there are confounding
elements as the groups are not truly independent.
- 20
Descriptive responses are reported for all questions both pre and post mmpc. The
questionnaire identified professional levels of staff (i.e. registered nurse, enrolled nurse
and assistant in nursing), making some comparison between groups possible.
PHASE THREE:
In this phase the development and trial of the multidisciplinary mmpc for residents with
end-stage dementia was undertaken. This part of the study adopted a case management
approach, with the research team tracking the care required and received by residents who
had been identified with end-stage dementia and requiring a palliative approach to their
care.
The mmpc introduced into the two facilities was based on the publication Guidelines for A
Palliative Approach in Residential Aged Care Facilities (Commonwealth of Australia
2003).
The principles forming the basis of the mmpc in this study were:
1. a palliative approach could be provided in the resident’s familiar surroundings if

adequately skilled staff were available
2. a multidisciplinary team that promoted goal setting in collaboration with the family
was critical to providing a palliative approach
3. care should promote quality of life and dignity of the resident
4. both health professionals and families were aware of any legal or non-legal
advance directives, in particular with regard to life-sustaining treatment measures
such as hydration and nutrition, or had conversations with the person with
dementia in the past in which the person had indicated their wishes in the event of
severe debilitating illness
5. health professionals and families would agree to adhere to any legal advance
directives the resident had expressed
6. the resident had impeccable and ongoing assessment and adequate treatment of
pain and other symptoms
7. the resident had spiritual and psychological support
8. the family would be supported throughout the trajectory of care and in particular
would be made aware of the signs of impending death so as to facilitate the
resident’s and family’s wishes at death and in bereavement
9. the use of trained palliative care volunteers could be integrated into the
multidisciplinary team to provide a palliative approach
Support for implementation:
1. Education for nursing staff on the principles of a palliative approach (as described
in Phase Two).
2. Multidisciplinary case conferencing with the resident, their family, nursing,

medical and allied health staff using the Enhanced Primary Care Guidelines
(Harvey 2006).
The aims of the mmpc case conference were to:

• identify care needs from a multidisciplinary perspective
- 21
• identify outcomes to be achieved by members of the mmpc team giving care
and service to the resident
• identify the tasks that need to be undertaken to achieve those outcomes
• allocate those tasks to members of the mmpc team
• assess whether previously identified outcomes (if any) have been achieved
3. Support for nursing staff in the implementation of an mmpc. This included:

• mentoring by research staff member to assist in facilitating the mmpc case
conference
• a pro forma designed by the research team to summarise information that
would be required for discussing a palliative approach for the resident
(Appendix 3)
• nursing staff reviewing care plans and documentation following the mmpc case
conference to incorporate goals of care as discussed with the multidisciplinary
team and family
• formal liaison and support available from the area palliative care service for
both nursing staff and general practitioners
Implementation of the model of multidisciplinary palliative care

Senior nursing staff were asked to identify residents within their facilities who may be
suitable for inclusion in the study.
Inclusion criteria:
• Diagnosis of dementia in residential care notes

• Incontinence
• Functionally non-verbal or making noises that might appear to show distress
• Showed a reduced interest in, or opposition to, taking food and fluids
• Had experienced weight loss
• Experienced pain
• Had poor skin integrity
• Had poor peripheral circulation
• Judged by experienced nursing staff that they would be expected to die within
the next 12 months
Exclusion criteria:
• The resident had no diagnosis of dementia

• The resident was not considered to be in the end-stage of their disease as decided
by the GP, the multidisciplinary team, palliative care consultant and the resident’s
lawfully authorised representative(s)
• Permission for inclusion in the study could not be obtained from the resident’s
lawfully authorised representative(s)
• There was, or had been, family conflict about their clinical management
• Permission for inclusion in the study could not be obtained from the resident’s
GP.
- 22
General Practitioner involvement
Prior to the commencement of the mmpc the nine general practitioners who provided care
at either one or both of the facilities were sent an information pack. General practitioners
were then contacted by the Chief Investigator to discuss their involvement in the mmpc
and specifically their availability for mmpc case conferences. Of the nine approached, 2
indicated they would have been willing to participate but were closing their practices, 3
general practitioners agreed to be involved in the project and the remaining 4 declined as
they did not have care of residents who they thought were currently suitable or would be
during the study period.
Recruitment of residents and families
Nursing staff were asked to identify residents who met the criteria for inclusion in the
mmpc and whose care was provided by one of the three general practitioners who had
agreed to support the mmpc. Once the nursing staff had identified a resident as meeting
these criteria, their family member or substitute decision maker was contacted by the
nursing staff to ascertain whether the research team could approach them and invite them
to participate in the study. Where possible (depending on geographical location) a
member of the research team met in person with this person and gained consent. The
resident’s general practitioner was then invited by the nursing staff to participate in a
multidisciplinary palliative care case conference.
The target sample for residents to be included in the mmpc was twenty five from the two
facilities, based on the number of studies in the retrospective phase of the research.
Recruitment in the larger of the two facilities became more difficult when one of the three
GPs chose not to continue participating in the study. As this GP had the care of a
significant portion of residents in the facility, estimated to be 70-80% of the facility’s
total population, recruitment in this facility was affected (6, compared to 11 in the other
facility). Due to financial constraints it was not possible to extend the study time,
therefore the final sample for Phase Three was seventeen residents rather than the
anticipated twenty five.
A member of the research team visited the resident at least fortnightly to record care that
had been required and provided (Appendix 4), informally interview staff regarding the
residents’ condition and where possible speak with family members.
Data collection
A range of data collection methods were employed to evaluate the mmpc. These included:
• recording by the research team of the documented care provided to the resident
and family each fortnight from the residents’ clinical case notes, using a template
designed for this purpose, to ensure consistency of data collection
• documentation of mmpc goals and outcomes
- 23
• a case note audit for each resident who died during the study period using the SM-
EOLD that had been used for residents in Phase One
• participant observation and photography (where possible and if consent was
obtained) of nursing staff, family members and residents
• interviews conducted with nurses, doctors, multi-disciplinary personnel and
ancillary staff, focusing on the management of the resident’s signs and symptoms
and overall wellbeing during his/her final stages
• interviews with families regarding their perception of the palliative approach for
their relative
• interviews with bereaved family members for residents who had died during the
study period, including the administration of the SWC-EOLD scale used to
retrospectively review satisfaction with care for bereaved carers in Phase One
• administration of the palliative care nursing staff questionnaire prior to and after
the introduction of the mmpc
- 24
RESULTS
PHASE ONE
Case Note Audits – prior to the mmpc
• Of the 25 residents included in the retrospective audit, three (12%) had a

conference relevant to palliative care recorded in their files in the 90 days
immediately prior to death. Of these three, two had the involvement of the family,
General Practitioners and nursing staff members and one was attended only by
nursing staff and no family. In the two multidisciplinary conferences the issue of a
palliative approach and psychosocial issues were discussed. However, in the
nursing only conference, despite being conducted only 19 days before the resident
died, no documentation of the discussion of a palliative approach was recorded in
the nursing notes. All three case conferences were recorded on a standard form
used by the facilities but no formal structure to record planned results of actions
from the conference was evident in the case notes.
• Only 2 (8%) of the 25 residents had an Advance Health Directive (AHD) although
we were able to find documentation in 19 (76%) of the residents’ notes that
indicated the person required a palliative approach in the 90 days prior to death.
The median number of days for which the actual delivery of palliative approach
was documented for these residents was three days, indicating this mode of care
was introduced only when the resident was very close to death.
• The SM-EOLD scale was used to quantify symptoms experienced by the residents
in the 90 days prior to death. Figure 1 indicates that agitation, resistiveness to care,
pain and skin breakdown were the most common symptoms recorded in the
residents’ case notes in the 90 days prior to death. Fear, depression and anxiety
were only recorded for a small number of residents but this may be more likely to
reflect a failure to record these symptoms in the notes rather than the absence of
these symptoms altogether (Figure 1).
Figure 1- The SM-EOLD Scale for residents who died prior to the
Fear
Anxiety
Shortness of Breath
Depression Never
Once a month
Agitation
2-3 days month
Resistiveness to care 1 x wk
Pain
Skin Breakdown
Calm
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
- 25
Case Note Audits – following the mmpc
• Of the 17 residents who participated in the mmpc 12 (71%) had a palliative care
mmpc conducted as part of the study. Attendance at these mmpcs varied but all
were attended by the residents’ General Practitioner, at least one senior nursing
staff member and a member of the research team. Allied health staff varied from
social workers, occupational therapists, physiotherapists and pastoral care workers.
In all but two mmpcs at least one member of the family was present.
• The 5 residents who did not have an mmpc during the study period died prior to
the mmpc being conducted. However, for one of these residents a case conference
had occurred prior to the introduction of the mmpc. For this resident the issues of
advance directive and palliative care were discussed and documented.
• For the 9 residents who died during the study period case notes were audited using
the SM-EOLD scale. This indicated that the symptoms of pain, resistiveness to
care, skin breakdown, agitation and shortness of breath were the most common
symptoms recorded in the residents’ case notes in the 90 days prior to death.
Depression was not recorded at all and fear only for one resident (Figure 2).
Figure 2 - The SM-EOLD Scale for residents who died following the
Fear
Anxiety
Shortness of Breath
Depression Never
Once a month
Agitation
2-3 days month
Resistiveness to care 1 x wk
Pain
Skin Breakdown
Calm
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
• Only 2 (11.8%) of the 17 residents had a written an Advance Health Directive,

however 9 (52.9%) had appointed an Enduring Power of Attorney and all but 2
residents had funeral details recorded. Both of these 2 residents had appointed an
Enduring Power of Attorney. One of the residents with an Advance Health
Directive also had appointed an Enduring Power of Attorney.
- 26
Comparisons of Case Note Audits
The case notes of 25 residents who died prior to the introduction of the mmpc and the case
notes of the nine residents who had died following the mmpc were audited using the SM-
EOLD The difference in numbers pre (n=25) and post (N=9) mmpc meant it is not feasible
to perform inferential statistical comparisons of the data, but as can be seen in Table 1
there are some differences in the recording of symptoms. Shortness of breath, pain,
anxiety, resistiveness to care and agitation were recorded more frequently for the nine
residents following the introduction of the mmpc. It appears the focus on the importance
of accurate and timely documentation of symptoms during the education sessions accounts
for an increase in awareness of symptoms and better reporting. Ratings of pain illustrate
this point. Following the introduction of the mmpc pain was reported for a greater number
of residents as occurring as frequently as weekly with a lower number reporting pain as
never present. The education program addressed the importance of documenting the
presence of pain and the effectiveness of any interventions. A higher recording of the
presence of pain may indicate that the education sessions were effective, leading to better
assessment and better practice.
Table 1 - The SM-EOLD for residents prior to and following the introduction
of the mmpc
Never Once a month 2-3 days month 1 x wk
% % % % % % % %
Pre Post Pre Post Pre Post Pre Post
Calm 0 0 0 0 4 22.2 96 77.8
Skin Breakdown 20 11.1 20 22.2 12 11.1 48 55.6
Pain 24 0 12 0 24 22.2 40 77.8
Resistiveness to care 48 22.2 20 0 32 11.1 28.6 66.7
Agitation 60 11.1 12 11.1 28 44.4 19 33.3
Depression 96 100 4 0 0 0 0 0
Shortness of Breath 64 11.1 24 66.7 4 22.2 8 0
Anxiety 88 55.6 8 22.2 4 0 0 22.2
Fear 96 88.9 4 11.1 0 0 0 0
The SWC-EOLD – prior to the mmpc
• Carers whose relative had died in the 12 months prior to the introduction of the
mmpc were asked to complete the SWC-EOLD Scale during an interview. Table 2
indicates high satisfaction levels for involvement in decision making (Q1),
measures for comfort care (Q3), sensitivity to carer needs (Q4), nursing assistance
(Q7) and provision of treatments that the person would have benefited from (Q9).
Q2, Q5 and Q10 are negative questions. Results for Q2 and Q5 therefore indicate
satisfaction in that carers strongly disagree or disagree that they needed more
- 27
information or did not understand the person’s condition. Results for Q10 indicate
that there was some dissatisfaction with the medical care received with 56% of
carers agreeing or strongly agreeing with this statement. These results are
supported by Q6 which indicates 40% of carers did not know who was in charge of
care and Q8 where 40% of carers felt medications were not clearly explained.
Table 2 - The SWC – EOLD Scale prior to the introduction of the mmpc
Question Strongly Disagree Agree Strongly

Disagree Agree
N % N % N % N %
1 I felt fully involved in all decision 1 4 3 12 12 48 9 36
making.
2# I would probably have made 3 12 15 60 5 20 2 8
different decisions if I had had more
information.
3 All measures were taken to keep my 0 0 2 8 10 40 13 52
care recipient comfortable.
4 The health care team was sensitive 0 0 2 8 12 48 11 44
to my needs and feelings
5# I did not really understand my care 3 12 16 64 5 20 1 4
recipient's condition.
6 I always knew which doctor or 1 4 9 36 11 44 4 16
nurse was in charge of my care
recipient.
7 I feel that my care recipient got all 0 0 0 0 10 40 15 60
necessary nursing assistance.
8 I felt that all medication issues were 2 8 8 32 10 40 5 20
clearly explained to me.
9 My care recipient received all 0 0 0 0 12 48 13 52
treatments or interventions that he or
she could have benefited from.
10# I felt my care recipient needed better 9 36 2 8 8 32 6 24
medical care at the end of life.
# These questions are reverse coded
The SWC-EOLD – following the mmpc
• Carers of residents who died after the introduction of the mmpc were asked to
complete the SWC-EOLD scale during a bereavement interview. Table 3 indicates
high satisfaction levels for measures for comfort care (Q3), sensitivity to carer
needs (Q4), nursing assistance (Q7) and provision of treatments that the person
would have benefited from (Q9). Q2, Q5 and Q10 are negative questions. Results
for Q2 and Q5 therefore indicate satisfaction in that carers strongly disagree or
disagree that they needed more information or did not understand the person’s
condition. Results for Q10 indicate that there was satisfaction with the medical
care received with 87.5% of carers disagreeing or strongly disagreeing with this
statement. Q6 indicates 37.5% of carers did not know who was in charge of care
and Q8 indicates 62.5% of carers felt medications were not clearly explained,
suggesting that carers accept medical care as being as good as is possible and
perhaps the authority of the doctor as the expert, without necessarily having their
needs for information met.
- 28
Table 3 - The SWC- EOLD Scale following the introduction of the mmpc
Question Strongly Disagree Agree Strongly

Disagree Agree
N % N % N % N %
1 I felt fully involved in all decision 0 0 3 37.5 2 25 3 37.5
making.
2# I would probably have made 3 37.5 4 50 0 0 1 12.5
different decisions if I had had more
information.
3 All measures were taken to keep my 0 0 0 0 2 25 6 75
care recipient comfortable.
4 The health care team was sensitive 0 0 1 12.5 4 50 3 37.5
to my needs and feelings
5# I did not really understand my care 2 25 6 75 0 0 0 0
recipient's condition.
6 I always knew which doctor or 2 25 1 12.5 3 37.5 2 25
nurse was in charge of my care
recipient.
7 I feel that my care recipient got all 0 0 0 0 3 37.5 5 62.5
necessary nursing assistance.
8 I felt that all medication issues were 2 25 3 37.5 1 12.5 2 25
clearly explained to me.
9 My care recipient received all 0 0 0 0 5 62.5 3 37.5
treatments or interventions that he or
she could have benefited from.
10# I felt my care recipient needed better 3 37.5 4 50 0 0 1 12.5
medical care at the end of life.
# These questions are reverse coded
Comparisons of the SWC-EOLD prior to and following the introduction

of the mmpc
• In addition to reporting percentage agreements and disagreements for each person

completing the SWC-EOLD a total score can be calculated.
• The possible scores on the SWC-EOLD scale range from 10 to 40 with a higher
score indicating more satisfaction. The SWC-EOLD scores for carers prior to the
mmpc ranged from 23 to 39 with mean of 30.68 (standard deviation 4.57). The
SWC-EOLD scores for carers after the mmpc ranged from 24 to 34 with a mean of
31 (standard deviation 3.8), indicating a slightly higher satisfaction rating, however
this was not statistically significant. The sample size is too small to have statistical
power, and the results need to be interpreter with caution. At best it indicates that
the direction is positive, and that in a larger study results may prove the
effectiveness of the mmpc. In this study the findings were strengthened by the
results of the interviews with carers (as reported in the next section).
• Figure 3 indicates the differences between ratings on the SWC-EOLD for bereaved
carers prior to the and after the introduction of the mmpc:
o More carers post mmpc indicated they would not have made different
decisions and therefore were satisfied with the direction of care provided.
This difference was not statistically significant.
o More carers post mmpc agreed that all measures were taken to keep the
resident comfortable. This difference was not statistically significant
o More carers post mmpc understood the care that was being provided. This
difference was not statistically significant
- 29
o More carers post mmpc disagreed that they felt the resident needed better
medical care at the end of life, indicating satisfaction with care. This
difference was not statistically significant
.
Figure 3 - The SWC-EOLD Scale prior to and following the introduction of

the mmpc
3.5
Pre mmpc
3
2.5
Post mmpc
Mean
2
1.5
0.5
0
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10
SWC-EOLD
Note a higher mean score indicates satisfaction
1 I felt fully involved in all decision making.

2 I would probably have made different decisions if I had had more information.
3 All measures were taken to keep my care recipient comfortable.
4 The health care team was sensitive to my needs and feelings
5 I did not really understand my care recipient's condition.
6 I always knew which doctor or nurse was in charge of my care recipient.
7 I feel that my care recipient got all necessary nursing assistance.
8 I felt that all medication issues were clearly explained to me.
9 My care recipient received all treatments or interventions that he or she could have
benefited from.
10 I felt my care recipient needed better medical care at the end of life.
- 30
Interviews with Bereaved Carers prior to the mmpc
Twenty-five carers whose family member had died before the introduction of the mmpc
were interviewed by a member of the research team to ascertain from their perspective
satisfaction with care and issues concerning palliative care for their relative who had died.
Interviews were conducted in the carers’ own home and tape recorded. Interviews were
transcribed and analysed thematically by two members of the research team using NVIVO
software. In addition, at the interview carers were asked to complete the SWC-EOLD
scale (already reported).
Analysis of Interviews
All interviews were read without coding, and then re-read to identify possible preliminary
codes. A total of 20 preliminary codes were developed (see Appendix 5). All interviews
were initially coded using these 20 codes. Information at each code was then reviewed and
the coding categories refined and reduced to seven final themes.
1. Nobody sat us down and said “This is going to happen”

2. “To have one person that really knew her and me”
3. “Why would you want to keep living like that”
4. “I don't know if it was pain or the dementia”
5. “Somewhere private for the last few days”
6. Reluctance for interventions as death approaches
7. “I wonder what I’ll do when I haven’t got him”
Nobody sat us down and said “This is going to happen”
Carers were asked to reflect on whether they had recognised any change in their relative’s
health to indicate that a palliative approach may be warranted or whether they had been
informed by nursing or medical staff that a change in the individuals’ condition indicated
this was the case.
Some comments that indicated relatives were aware of their relative’s condition and
particularly the possibility of impending death included:
No, well as I say we expected it then. My sister didn’t but I did, cause you could see she
was deteriorating…because when my sister said mums been moved into the other section
(non-secure area), and I said well that’s the end of her. She won’t last there long. (I
don’t know how long she was there) I don’t think it was very long, 2 or 3 months. (96)
Oh yes you could see he was deteriorating every day we used to see him…we knew it was
coming, the nurses were pretty, they deal with it all the time and they knew exactly and
they sort of let us know that when they moved him to the last room where the family
spends time, he was only there for a couple of days….we could see the changes over the
years, the last two years, my attitude was we should hurry and not let him suffer. … I did
ask, is there anything I can do?, and my daughter was reading up on, cause they leave you
this little book in the room, just to explain things to you, what these little stages are and
how before they actually die. (187)
- 31
I didn't realise he was in the last stages, no, no, no. No, not really. Then again we were
just - even when I looked after him - if he was late stirring in the morning I would send my
husband in, just in case. I couldn't face the fact that he might not be with us any more.
(24)
Some families had been given an indication by health professionals prior to coming into
the RACF:
The nurse in charge at the hospital informed us that she had seen quite a few with this
particular affliction and she said they usually only last 12 to 18 months so she was pretty
well spot on. She was the first one who was truthful in telling us what to expect, what
length of time he had left. We appreciated that. … (186)
This comment indicates that medical staff in the acute care environment had not clearly
discussed the trajectory of dementia with the family but one of the nursing staff had
broached this topic. As indicated this was greatly appreciated by the family.
They said she would have to go into care. There was no way I could do that here. She
would literally have to be showered, toileted. She could get out of bed, still shuffle to the
toilet. Because of her strong will, she tried. Then I had to start to look around. That was
hard. She was dying. I knew, wherever she went, it wouldn't be long. It was the next step.
It was a lot of strain on me at that time, looking for places. …….As far as going into
palliative care, I think the palliative time is the hardest time, I guess, for saying goodbye
and preparing yourself and letting them go. For the carer, maybe the palliative time is the
carer's time as well, when they need the support the most………..I needed someone for me
too. I was anxious. I was pleading with my mum, "Go, Mum. Go peacefully. Don't fight
it." I didn't think I would ever say that. I didn't want to see her suffer. It was good that -
they listened as far as what my mother wanted, although she couldn't speak. I wanted her
to go without machines or drugs. Even antibiotics - as long as she wasn't in pain. There
was no quality of life for her. (99)
There was a need for health care professionals to realise that the relatives were not
necessarily aware of how much a person had deteriorated or the implications of infections,
frailty and deterioration:
Everything was malfunctioning. Yes it was the doctor told us that on the last day, that
everything was just gradually going down, the heart, the liver, kidneys and we didn’t
realise he was quite at that stage….cause we could see that he was sinking but people do
rally, I mean he'd had a previous infection and he looked, he just sort of sat in a huddle
but he got better from that that’s why I think um we could have been a little bit better
informed……….The doctor came and we were over visiting and he’d had a chest infection
all week and he came down with pneumonia, and the doctors said that he probably had a
few days but he didn’t in actual fact because he died that night but I’d gone home but my
sister has a sixth sense about these things because she went back with one of her
daughters and he died while she was there but I wasn’t there, I should have been but I
wasn’t….to tell you the truth I didn’t expect it to be as quick. (335)
One carer identified that it was sometimes hard to get an idea of exactly what was
happening and some idea of timeframes:
- 32
We made a point of going there one afternoon. We went and sat on the seashore and
waited for him (the GP) to do his rounds. I got him to ring me on my mobile so I could
come in. He was a little hard to nail down. That's par for the course. I appreciate that.
That was at a time when dad was no longer eating or drinking. He asked us what level of
care did we want for him and that's a tough decision but we both said - we are not medical
- medically qualified. He had no quality of life so we said "Let him go.” which is what
happened. We only met him once or twice. We rang him a couple of times at his rooms.
We spoke to him. The nursing staff kept us informed with medication……….It wasn't
explained to us. Nobody sat us down and said "This is what is going to happen." All along
the way it was said to us - I was getting to a point where I had enough so to speak and it's
really sad. I felt I was being a bit cold about it and saying it was time for him to move on.
I was like "How long is this going to be?" They said there was no timeframe. It could take
a day or a week or two weeks. Whenever I asked they were up-front about it and
explained it as nicely as they could. Nobody sat down with us like the doctor and said "No
further care." Nobody physically gave us a spiel about it. I think in our minds we were
clear on what was going to happen. (355)
I was there the night before and nobody indicated to me that they thought she was any
different or that they thought she was dying but I felt it. I came home and I rang my sister.
I said "Have you been up to see (name suppressed) this week?" She said "No." I said "If I
were you I would get up there tomorrow morning." They rang me up at six o'clock that
Saturday morning and she was gone. If you are seeing someone all the time you don't
notice so much but, if you see someone every second or third day, they change. It was her
breathing I had noticed. It was not 100 percent. She was 92.
I knew that she wasn't 100 percent but a couple of other times she had come very close to
it too where all of a sudden she was not well and I thought "You don't look good. You
don't sound good." She came good. She sort of brightened up and she was fine. That was
about a year ago. It was a few years before that. Her general health remained about the
same but, because when you go there she is in bed all the time and she is bathed and
clean, it wasn't that obvious that she was deteriorating. You could still notice a bit of
deterioration. (333)
Even at the last day when she began to die, that was about a week previous but when it got
to the last night I spent a fair bit of time down there. I thought she would be gone by the
morning. I knew it was going to happen. It was a question of time and she was gone in
the morning. He (the GP) had a chat to me. He told me the situation when she was dying -
this will die off and that will die off and finally the last thing will go. You don't just die
like that. It seems you go in stages. It took over a week. Bits and pieces died off until she
finally died. (954)
These quotes illustrate that for bereaved carers prior to the introduction of the mmpc
limited information was provided regarding the possible trajectory of dementia or
impending death of their relative. This was despite carers themselves often having an idea
that their relative was deteriorating, likely to die and they would have welcomed
conversations regarding this. In the final quote a conversation with the general
practitioner meant the carer was clear on what might happen and was able to be present at
the time of death.
“To have one person that really knew her and me”
- 33
Carers made comments about aspects of care they were dissatisfied with. This ranged
from lack of time staff had to spend with their relative, co-ordination of care, lack of
information, perceptions of a loss of identity of the person by staff and not enough
emotional support for the carers both during and after their relative’s death. The following
quotes by carers seem to sum up a problem within the residential aged care system that is
exacerbated when someone is dying:
The thing I felt most is to really have one person - I know it's impossible - that really
would know her well enough - and me. That would be the ideal situation. I was talking to
different nurses at different times. They are doing different shifts. You get the agency
nurses. You are getting lots of different people at the facility. You are trying to
communicate with them. You might get told one thing by one. Occasionally you make a
connection.(99)
She was just like a number there, they wouldn’t tell you anything, either you could stand
at the desk for about 10- minutes and they would eventually say, can we help you, and
we’d say how’s mum, oh yes she’s good, she’s good you know. And you would go in and
mum wasn’t good. (96)
I always felt that she was just lonely because she wasn't with the others. ………She loved
her music and I don't think that was played enough to her. I think she should have had
her music. We took a radio and cassette player over to her. I think she should have had
that continuously playing to her. She loved her music. She would sit there and whistle.
(142)
I think possibly there was a lack of communication between whoever was on that
particular shift and the next shift and ah the boss man perhaps they just didn’t get
together enough to discuss how unhappy he was where he was. ….I would try to get him
into an area where he had a little less noise and little bit more privacy, cause he did have
to fight off a couple of men that happened to come round and blunder through his curtain,
that’s why I feel a sliding door that staff can open and he can open from the inside just to
give a little more privacy for a private person. …..just for that little bit more privacy. I
think that’s very important. (35.
I think the main thing is staff. I think the nurses done everything they could, ah but I think
they were overworked and they would have liked to give the patients more sort of care but
they done a good job with the hours they were there. (3)
I know that they were horribly understaffed as most care places are. He was bedbound
and I would say in the fetal position all the time. I used to wheel him out in his special
chair outside to get some sunshine and away from inside. It used to worry me a bit that
when I left him - I used to go up every day and feed him at lunchtime. It used to worry me
- when I left I know the girls were anxious to get them all to bed because of the time factor
and the staff. Then I thought "Well, that's going to go on until the next day until almost
nearly lunchtime”. (29)
Despite these negative comments carers also referred to the positive way that their
relatives had been cared for in the facility. These included comments concerning comfort
for the resident and carer, respect and being able to provide what the resident required:
- 34
They were wonderful they did keep her comfortable I will admit. (96)
He was very comfortable, yes. They all treated him so lovely, they really did. I couldn't
fault it. It is such a busy place. Looking after a person that has been like that, it is such a
constant sort of job. We all feel - the whole family believed that he was so well looked
after down there. (24)
In the nursing home I can't fault them in any way. My husband and I were very happy
with everything that was done. There was nothing that - whatever my husband asked them
to do, they did. (777)
I stayed with her all night. She had a real peaceful night. They were very good to me.
They allowed me to stay the night. They made a chair for me. There was a couple of
older nurses like angels. They kept popping in. (4913)
The way they treated us and her when she was dying I thought was lovely. It was just
beautiful. I have no complaints. They were continually with us. They gave us a book to
read to explain what she would be going through. They had her in the one room on her
own. That was nice that there was nobody else there. They kept making her look pretty,
fresh. She looked nice…….. They let us stay with her as long as we wanted to afterwards.
We all took our turns on our own and we were all there together and we all left together.
(85)
Carers were acutely aware of the staffing issues in residential care that impacted on what
well meaning and skilled staff could achieve within the funding constraints. The positive
comments which reflected how carers felt the resident had been cared for were
predominantly focused on comfort. Unfortunately, negative comments illustrate the
frustration with dealing with an understaffed and disjointed care system. The previous
theme of carers not being provided information about deterioration and impending death is
further illustrated by this theme, the inability for carers to have one person as the contact
to discuss concerns.
Why would you want to keep living like that
For most carers’ there was clear recognition and acceptance that once their relative had
reached the stage where eating and drinking become difficult or food and drink was being
refused that this was a sign of impending death and no artificial hydration or nutrition
should be provided.
First of all at the beginning of the fortnight he said he was hungry, he didn’t have his eyes
open but he said he was hungry and I said to the nurse to my friend actually he husband
was down there and he’d passed away down there to, and I said to her well I don’t know,
if he’s lying there and even though he’s half asleep why don’t they give him food, and she
told the nurse and the next time I was down there the nurse said are you worrying we are
not feeding him, well I said I am actually, I said well you know I just feel that that might
be killing him or something. She said no, she explained to me the body breaks down and
she explained it fully to me, she said if we feed him and he is breaking down…I had at the
beginning of the fortnight, I had this tea or some liquid I could dribble in his mouth, that
he could just sort of swallow, in the end he just didn’t sort of swallow. And I thought to
myself this well this is how you go… and I rang the Dr and he said well look, , he said you
know, I think poor old (resident’s name) is getting so weak, he said, we could put a tube
- 35
and feed him with a tube, but he said do you really think he would want that. He said he’d
get infections and everything, and I said no, no he wouldn’t, because he would be pulling
it out wherever it was, and throwing it out and I just know he couldn’t so, he was very
good too, he said if you ever need me, and I can help, feel free to do so. (13)
I couldn’t fault them for the care that they gave her. They would sit and persevere to feed
her; I wouldn’t even try, because she would not eat for me…Why would you want to keep
living like that, you know. Its not a, you can’t go anywhere your just sitting, and your not
with anyone except other people who are in the same position, at least mum could talk,
some of them couldn’t even talk you know. The nurses were lovely because they did talk
to her and they did pay her attention and everything, and they made a fuss over her, and
um, I know that you know, if you don’t want to be like that, well I suppose you wouldn’t
want to eat would you, and not only that its hard work for the body to digest food isn’t it,
when you are so weak and frail, the body, everything is an effort for the body isn’t it…..I
wouldn’t ask them to sit there for hours pushing food into her. I think that’s cruel. I
wouldn’t expect them to do that. You can offer it, but if they don’t want it I would never
force feed, no, no, they did persevere a little bit and some days she would have something
but then another day she might go for 3 days and not have much you know. But I would
just say to them don’t worry about it, you know, just give it to her and if she wants it and if
she doesn’t want it then don’t worry about it.(25)
However, for one carer the decision to discontinue feeding was difficult although in the
end no artificial hydration or nutrition was provided:
A couple of people there, when we were talking about wanting to try and feed her and
somebody said to me "Is it for you that you want to do it or is it for her?"… I felt it was for
her, to keep her going. Though maybe it is me being selfish, wanting to keep her going for
me. (142)
In one instance, when relatives were coming from interstate, artificial hydration was
offered as a possible solution for prolonging death, however to no avail:
They did their best to try and get some fluids in. She eventually stopped eating. When she
stopped solids they started on fluids and tried as much as they could to keep up her
fluids… Her daughter lives interstate and she was coming, I think my husband asked them
to put her on a drip or something and tried to keep her going until the daughter came.
They did do it but she didn't last until her daughter came, yes. (355)
Knowledge that a person is unable to tolerate food and fluids is emotive for family
members but most were comfortable that as difficulty with this increased continued
nutrition or hydration by artificial means was not appropriate. However, there were
examples illustrated by the previous two quotes where nutrition or hydration was pursued
and adequate explanation regarding the trajectory of dementia was not provided. In the
second quote there was no acknowledgement of impending death, and extraordinary life
sustaining measures were put in place that only added to the burden of care for the dying
person and did not change the outcomes.
Three carers described that their relative had problems with laboured breathing in a variety
of ways:
- 36
Yes she was beautiful, you know, you couldn’t do anything for her, and she was just
gasping, you could tell, you just felt like blowing and giving her some of your air. (96)
The breathing was a bit heavy, we could notice it was getting, it was heavy to start with
and then it started getting slower and slower. But actually the last night before, that night
he died, his breathing was sort of more relaxed. The change from heavy breathing to oh
yeh, I think he knew his time was up. (187)
There was recognition by one carer of the change in breathing patterns and the carer
described it with the colloquial term ‘death rattles’
Her breathing, I’ve never seen anybody die, and um it was just her breathing….it was
funny because Nan used to call it the death rattles, she used to be a nurse herself, she used
to talk about when people were dying they get this death rattles she called it, it sort of
went straight through my mind when I heard her, it was just her difficulty breathing that’s
all it was so, it just went through my mind because that’s what she always said (352)
I don't know if it was pain or the dementia
Pain was a common symptom experienced, although for the most part relatives seemed
content with the management of this:
I think any time they thought he had discomfort they - he would complain about his knee
sometimes or things like that, they always took care. I think the nursing were very
observant and, when people have dementia, they don't always think to say - or even be
able to say that they have got aches and pains. Dad was still able to complain a bit in a
way…He would come and go a bit with his ability to express himself. He was still able to
let you know if he wasn't well. (159)
Some comments referred to the link between commencing Morphine as a sign of

impending death:
The doctors were coming all the time, and I think probably generally we all knew nothing
was going to pull dad out of this because he was just so thin and his foot was then
gangrenous, the toe, it gave him a lot of pain and he was in you know had a lot of strong
drugs you know Morphine and so on and I knew too that when Morphine started that
would be the beginning of the end.(97)
There was also difficulty of judging whether the person was in pain or it was part of the
dementia that caused them to verbalise and relatives not understanding this:
Fortunately they have comfortable beds there that gave her a lot of support with the water
beds, air beds. That was the main thing, because of the pain she was suffering. Not only
with the dementia, she had other things going on with her neck such as osteoporosis. That
was very painful and it went into her shoulder. What happened is that they said they
couldn't correct it because the tissue just disappears from the bones and they are just
rubbing. At her age there was nothing to do but give her pain-killers. She was on pretty
powerful pain-killers a lot of the time…..Occasionally when I went to the hospital she was
in a lot of pain, hanging on to her shoulder. I felt in the facility, yeah, I am pleased that
they were controlling it, as far as I know. When you walked through the corridor towards
- 37
her room you could hear her crying out and groaning and she was probably doing that for
a long time. She was probably upsetting other patients. I don't know. That is very hard.
What can you do, I suppose? That groaning - I don't know if it was pain or the dementia.
It wasn't ever really clear to me. (46)
Pain assessment and management for residents with end stage dementia is a complex and
difficult task. The first quote illustrate that carers were aware that it was difficult for their
relative to express their pain but they felt that the nursing staff were aware of his non-
verbal pain behaviours. The second quote illustrates the perception that once someone is
commenced on morphine that the person will not live long and the final quote captures
one of the major issues facing staff in residential aged care facilities looking after people
with end stage dementia. The crying out and groaning in this instance doesn’t appear to
have been resolved with the relatives and while there is acknowledgment that she was on
strong pain killers the fact that she was able to be heard as they entered the facility
indicated that she was not comfortable.
Somewhere private for the last few days
Few residents in the facilities had a single room and staff where possible made attempts to
find a private area for the resident and their relatives to spend the last few days. One of the
facilities had a palliative care room which was a disused shared room. As such it had room
for relatives to stay overnight.
They said they would put her into that room and I said that’s good and I stayed there that
night, on the Wednesday night I stayed with her, because she sort of knew and wanted me,
but once they got the Morphine into her she seemed to just sleep a lot, and not really, by
the Saturday night she just wasn’t aware really. I talked to her and everything but I got
no response. (25)
In the other facility no extra space was available so it made it harder for relatives to
provide ongoing support over a period of few days:
But it probably would have been nice if they’d had a bed or something or a ward that a
family member could be moved in with the patient and have a bed to sleep in to stay with
him, they didn’t have that for me and you know for me, that’s fine I just wanted to be with
dad and that’s it. Comfort wise I suppose that um and somewhere where I could have had
a shower, my mother in law lived close and I was able to go there, but I was always
scared that um he would die when I was away, and one day just near the end they told me
to go and have a shower in one part which was another part of the building and even then
I was worried dad would pass away when. (97)
Where it was possible to move the resident after death into a private viewing area this was
also appreciated by the family:
They moved Dad's body into an unused room that had a bed and a little sitting area. They
said that we could all come down and Dad just looked like he was asleep in the bed there.
All of his daughters and a couple of his sons-in-law I suppose, we were all in the room.
They made us tea and coffee. It allowed us time to deal with the fact that Dad had gone.
Because he looked okay, it was like we were able to say goodbye in there really and I
- 38
think they were very good with that. The staff were very attentive to all of us. I think they
did that very well (159)
Few residential aged care facilities have the luxury of private rooms for all residents. In
one of the facilities four bed rooms were common, although some single rooms were
available and these were used where possible. In the other facility there are two beds to a
room but each area is separated by a partition providing some privacy for relatives. For
relatives who wish to be present for extended periods during the last few days the staff
make efforts to provide as much privacy and comfort as they can.
Reluctance for interventions as death approaches
Carers were often in the situation where decisions on treatment were required such as the
cessation of antibiotics or artificial hydration and nutrition. In the absence of an advance
directive this was sometimes a difficult decision and differing opinions between family
members were apparent:
and so as he progressively got worse, they did have him on antibiotics and everything, and
they said on the Tuesday we really think, you know they’d done his scans and everything
and they said look there is nothing we can do but we can keep him alive if you want. We
can keep force-feeding or intravenous feeding, and fluids and they said but I wouldn’t
want that done to me, and why would you want to do that. To prolong someone’s, and if
it’s really rough on them, but they had to talk about it. And I just said look, I don’t think I
would want that done, I would definitely not want that done to me, and…. so you know it
was very hard for her to agree to that, being his daughter you know, because its just such
an emotional thing, that they can’t let go, but we just had to talk her through it and say
that they agreed to stop the antibiotics on the Tuesday and then he died on the Thursday
afternoon, between 5.30 and 6. (25)
The Dr told me when he had a stroke like that he would keep sleeping more
and more. Before that, when he was in the facility, having a run around the trees, he
somehow put his scooter over the edge and he was rushed to the hospital. He had another
stroke. They said "He can't come out of this." My brother was with me. He said "Do you
want resuscitation?" I said "No." My brother said "Are you sure about what you are
doing?" I said "I know exactly what I am going. We don't want him to get any worse than
he is." We had already signed papers at the facility to say "No resuscitation". We don't
want people to be a vegetable. (98)
Quite frankly, if he had realised how bad he was going to get, he had said to me a few
times that he would have been - being an electrician, he said he would have put 250 volts
across himself. I think that was all talk….I shrugged it off because I knew I wouldn't do
anything to bring it on…. I wouldn't have wanted say, for instance - he wasn't on life
support - but I feel that - I don't know, being a Christian I just can't say "Don't give him
medicine, don't give him that sort of thing." (475)
One carer commented that she was unsure whether surgery for her mother three weeks
prior to death to remove a malignancy may have caused her mother to suffer more. The
daughter raised the issue of euthanasia:
- 39
She wasn't looking good since they took a skin graft from the top of her thigh to cover her
head when they took the lumps out……The doctor sort of indicated if she hadn't had it
done it would have killed her and maybe have been worse. She may have suffered more
but in retrospect maybe she hadn't. There is a lot to be said about euthanasia and lethal
injections in some of the circumstances where people are dying. (49)
In rare instances where an advance directive was completed it provided clear directions for
the carer:
There was a nurse there. I can't remember her name. She was an older nurse. She said
to me that because Mum had to sign papers years before, that she didn't want to be kept
alive in any way if she was going to die, she wanted to go naturally - that was already put
down. I think the nurse thought what I did, just letting my mum go rather than trying -
there was more signs of things happening, going wrong. They could have tried to keep
her alive a bit more but she would have gone eventually. She went very quietly in the end,
fortunately. ……….. It wasn't me saying it. She had already made the Yes she made it so
much easier. I knew she wanted it. I wanted it because she wanted it and it was made
very clear. She might have had the stroke then because her handwriting wasn't good. The
reason she wrote - she wanted to die with dignity. (46)
Two quotes illustrate the importance of the person having made an advance directive. In
one instance the daughter did not have to make those difficult decisions and the comment
on the advance directive signalled her mothers wish – to die with dignity. In the other the
issue of resuscitation had been discussed and documented and could be enacted in
instances of acute events. In one quote the relative speaks openly about euthanasia, in this
instance referring to the dilemma that the treatment may have been worse than no
treatment. The reference to the need for euthanasia indicates that at the point where these
decisions had to be made the choice of desire to end the suffering was not legally
available.
I wonder what I’m going to do when I haven’t got him
Dementia also affected the relationships that carers had with their relatives particularly
close relatives such as a spouse or a daughter. The constant care required meant
maintaining meaningful social relationships were difficult:
Four and a half… She lived with us. I did all the nice things for her. I did all the right
things for her. In the end she started to get unmanageable. She couldn't go to the toilet
properly. I would tell her to do something, wipe her bottom or put the paper in the toilet.
I got cranky with her. I will never forgive myself for this: I yelled at her.
...I can't forgive myself for just doing that to her. I swore at her. That wasn't me..
apologised to her. She said "What are you apologising for?" I said "Can you forgive
me?" She said "Of course I forgive you." She forgot. (142)
Similarly for carers who had daily contact the issue of what to do when the person had
died was raised:
Like I say I was there every afternoon for 2 and half years and I took treats down to my
husband and he knew me, because he had Parkinson, and he was just getting confused
probably in the last six months in my opinion, to the extent I was worried about him
- 40
getting confused, but it was probably a type of dementia, and spent the afternoon with him
….. I thought one day, I remember me thinking to myself walking in there one day, gee I
wonder what I’m going to do when I haven’t got him and I can’t come down, and then I
thought don’t worry about that it might be a long time and who knows what happens, but I
think the mere fact that I did that everyday with him and being an active person I think
that now I’m, I don’t think there’s anything, and I wouldn’t go and say to the doctor that
she might say oh you know, you’re a bit depressed have a pill or something. I don’t know
whether she would. (13)
The themes from interviews with bereaved carers prior to the implementation of the
mmpc illustrate a number of issues. The first two themes illustrate the poor
communication between relatives and staff. Relatives were often unaware of the
trajectory of dementia and particularly indicators that death was imminent. This seems
compounded by the lack of coordination or one person within the facility to whom the
relatives could communicate regarding their relatives care. However, despite this relatives
on the whole seemed clear on the futility of prolonging life by artificial means such as
hydration or nutrition. They were also very aware of other symptoms such as pain and the
difficulties of discerning whether their relative’s behaviour, such as calling out or
groaning was pain or part of the dementing process. In instances where advance directives
were available the dilemma of what to do when faced with emergency events or life
prolonging decisions was alleviated. Structural limitations within residential care,
particularly the lack of single rooms or relative space were highlighted when a relative
wished to spend extended periods of time by the bed side. This structural problem will
eventually be overcome with new facilities subject to tighter controls on the number of
occupants per room. In the meantime where facilities have rooms with multiple beds
efforts within the facility should be made for privacy. The difficulty for some relatives
adjusting to a change in routine once the person has died also suggests that bereavement
follow up and support should be available.
It was also clear from the interviews that most carers view palliative care as the same as
terminal care or care in the last days of life.
- 41
PHASE TWO
Education sessions
During December 2004 and January 2005 four education sessions were held at each
facility and were well attended by staff members. A total of 167 staff members from the
two facilities attended the education sessions. From Facility One, 40% and from Facility
Two, 68% of staff members attended at least one education session.
Staff Pre mmpc Questionnaire Results
Respondents
Two hundred and sixty six questionnaires were distributed to nursing staff before the
introduction of the mmpc and 157 were returned, an overall response rate of 59%. The
response rate for Facility Two (76%) was higher than for Facility One (54%). Of the 157
responses, 50 (32%) were from Registered Nurses, 25 (16%) were from Enrolled Nurses
and 81 (52%) from Assistants in Nursing. The median length of time respondents had
worked in aged care was 15 years with the minimum 1 year and maximum 40 years.
Summary of results
Responses to the non – PCQN questions
Tables 4 to 6 show responses from all staff to the 25 non-PCQN questions prior to the
mmpc. Table 4 indicates that while staff feel able to support families at the time of a
resident’s death, in situations were there is conflict or differing opinions staff are less
confident in providing this support. There are statistically significant differences in
responses between professional groups (RN, EN, AIN) for Q11 and Q15 with RNs feeling
more confident than ENs and AINs (see Appendix 6).
Table 4 - Responses to psychosocial questions pre mmpc
QUESTION N %
10. I feel comfortable talking to residents about dying Yes 97 62.6
No 18 11.6
Sometimes 40 25.8
11. I feel confident discussing death with resident’s families Yes 88 57.5
No 21 13.7
Sometimes 44 28.8
13. I feel confident about dealing with family members who are angry about care Yes 57 37.3
No 41 26.8
Sometimes 55 35.9
14. I feel confident talking with residents and their relatives when there is Yes 46 30.3
conflict
No 57 37.5
Sometimes 49 32.2
15. I feel confident dealing with situations in which there are differing opinions Yes 66 42.9
No 30 19.5
Sometimes 58 37.7
17. I feel able to support families at the time of a resident's death Yes 122 79.7
No 8 5.2
Sometimes 23 15
- 42
Table 5 indicates that there were mixed responses to organisational issues regarding
providing a palliative approach. While staff indicate that they feel valued as a team
member they do not feel supported following a resident’s death and would like more
reflection on a resident’s death. There are statistically significant differences between
professional groups (RN, EN, AIN) for questions 2, 12, 16, 21 and 22. While more RNs
felt their opinion was valued in discussing the care of dying residents (Q2), for the
remaining questions AINs reported more positive responses therefore indicating they were
more confident about having a process to follow in the care of a resident and that staff are
supported including debriefing (Appendix 6).
Table 5 - Responses to organisational questions pre mmpc
QUESTION N %
2. I believe my opinion is valued when discussing care of dying residents Yes 96 62.3
No 17 11
Sometimes 41 26.6
3. I feel valued as a team member involved with caring for dying residents Yes 111 71.2
No 14 9
Sometimes 31 19.9
12. There is a process for me to follow if I feel uncertain about the care of a Yes 133 86.9
resident
No 10 6.5
Sometimes 10 6.5
16. I believe that staff are supported following a resident’s death Yes 60 38.2
No 45 28.7
Sometimes 52 33.1
19. The nurses in our organisation usually agree on care given to terminally ill Yes 83 53.2
residents
No 26 16.7
Sometimes 47 30.1
20. When caring for a terminally ill resident, doctors, nurses and families work Yes 82 52.2
together
No 16 10.2
Sometimes 59 37.6
21. After a resident's death the nurses and care workers talk about what we did Yes 42 27.1
well
No 68 43.9
Sometimes 45 29
22. After a death, the nurses and care workers talk about what could be done Yes 32 20.5
better
No 59 37.8
Sometimes 65 41.7
Table 6 indicates that staff feel confident in many aspects of the clinical management
required for dying residents although perceptions of pain management appears mixed. The
low scores on questions pertaining to setting up a Graseby pump and drug conversion
reflect the diversity of skill level (RN, EN, AIN) of the respondents. There are statistically
significant differences between professional groups (RN, EN, AIN) for questions 1, 7, 8,
23 and 24 with RNs being more confident with these tasks (see Appendix 6).
- 43
Table 6 – Responses to clinical management questions pre mmpc
QUESTION N %
1. I am confident when discussing with others my assessment of a resident's Yes 115 77.2
symptoms
No 7 4.7
Sometimes 27 18.1
4. I have received extra training to help me care for dying residents Yes 82 52.6
No 67 42.9
Sometimes 7 4.5
5. My knowledge of the process of dying is good Yes 118 76.6
No 18 11.7
Sometimes 18 11.7
6. I always put the resident’s quality of life before routine nursing practice Yes 142 91.6
No 3 1.9
Sometimes 10 6.5
7. It is essential that dying residents are turned every 2-3 hours Yes 45 29.6
No 69 45.4
Sometimes 38 25
8. I am reluctant to use morphine for dying residents who don't have cancer Yes 8 6.7
No 104 86.7
Sometimes 8 6.7
9. Pain is well managed in our organisation Yes 63 40.6
No 18 11.6
Sometimes 74 47.7
18. It is always fully explained to me why treatments are introduced or Yes 62 39.5
changed
No 42 26.8
Sometimes 53 33.8
23. I am comfortable explaining resident's symptoms to GPs Yes 83 61
No 28 20.6
Sometimes 25 18.4
24. I am competent setting up a Graseby pump Yes 30 22.7
No 94 71.2
Sometimes 8 6.1
25. I am confident converting one analgesic drug to another Yes 23 18.5
No 81 65.3
Sometimes 20 16.1
Responses to the PCQN questions
Table 7 indicates the responses to the 17 PCQN questions.
Similar to the results from Tables 4 to 6 there are a number of questions where responses
indicate the need for education or organizational change. These include:
• Knowledge of the appropriateness of the palliative care

• Pain and symptom management
For 12 (questions 1, 2, 7, 8, 11, 12, 15, 16, 21, 22, 23 and 24) of the 17 questions there are
significant differences between professionals groups reflecting the bias of questions
towards the more professionally qualified. While RNs have a higher correct response rate
to most questions there is indication that knowledge in providing a palliative approach can
be improved in regard to pain and symptom management (see Appendix 7).
- 44
Table 7 - Responses to PCQN questions prior to the
mmpc
Correct N %
Answer
1. Palliative Care is appropriate only in situations where there is evidence F 78 50.3
of a downhill trajectory
2. It is crucial for family members to remain at the bedside until death F 108 69.2
occurs
3. The provision of palliative care requires emotional detachment F 108 69.2
4. The philosophy of palliative care is compatible with that of aggressive T 8 5.2
treatment
5. Morphine is the standard used to compare the analgesic effect of other T 39 28.1
opioids
6. The extent of the disease determines the method of pain treatment F 72 48
7. Adjuvant therapies are important in managing pain T 91 62.8
8. During the last days of life, the drowsiness associated with electrolyte T 32 22.2
imbalance may decrease the need for sedation
9. Drug addiction is a problem when morphine is used on a long term basis F 96 65.8
for the management of pain
10. Individuals who are taking opioids should also follow a bowel regime T 111 77.6
11. Drugs that can cause respiratory depression are appropriate for the T 44 32.6
treatment of severe dyspnoea
12. Suffering and physical pain are synonymous F 57 39
13. The use of placebos is appropriate in the treatment of some types of F 81 58.7
pain
14. In high doses, codeine causes more nausea and vomiting than T 56 40
morphine
15. Pethidine is not an effective analgesic in the control of chronic pain T 49 35
16. Manifestation of chronic pain are different from those of acute pain T 78 54.5
17. The pain threshold is lowered by anxiety or fatigue T 63 43.4
Staff Post mmpc Questionnaire Results
Respondents
Doing a questionnaire with nursing staff proved to be difficult. The nurse unit managers
were supportive and went to great lengths to encourage staff to complete the
questionnaires, but high staff turnover in one facility, a building program that affected the
units where people with dementia were mainly cared for, and changes in management
teams and structures probably had an impact on the completion of post mmpc
questionnaires. Two hundred and sixty six questionnaires were distributed to nursing staff
before the introduction of the mmpc and 157 were returned, an overall response rate of
59%. Two hundred and sixty six questionnaires were distributed to nursing staff at the
completion of the introduction of the mmpc (November 2005) and the response rate was
much lower at 42 (15.8%).
Of the 42 responses, 6 (14.3%) were from registered nurses, 10 (23.8%) were from
enrolled nurses and 26 (61.9%) from assistants in nursing. The median length of time
respondents had worked in aged care was 15 years with the minimum 1 year and
maximum 30 years.
- 45
Differences between professional groups
Due to the small numbers in each professional group in the post intervention response no
analysis was undertaken to distinguish between professional groups (see Appendix 8 and 9
for descriptive results).
Differences between pre and post questionnaire respondents
The number of questionnaires available for analysis after the mmpc was much smaller
than the number of questionnaires returned before the introduction of the mmpc, for
reasons previously stated. There were also differences in the composition of the two
groups. In the post mmpc group, there were fewer registered nurses (14.3% vs. 32%),
more enrolled nurses (23.8% vs. 16%) and more assistants in nursing (61.9% vs. 52%).
While these differences are not statistically significant they will have an impact on the
results. Similarly, the poor response rate post the introduction of the mmpc compared with
pre introduction of the mmpc does not reflect the broad range of knowledge and attitudes
of staff.
Summary of results
Responses to the non – PCQN questions
Table 8 to 10 shows responses to the 25 non-PCQN questions after the introduction of the
mmpc. Table 8 indicates a statistically significant difference between staff’s confidence in
discussing death with families (Q11) following the introduction of the mmpc, however
this is in a negative direction. This result may be due to the small number of staff who
completed the post test questionnaire, the change in professional mix to fewer registered
nurses who usually answer families’ questions about the care or an increase in knowledge
due to exposure to learning but not yet enough experience to be confident in applying the
knowledge. While not statistically significant staff felt able to support families at the time
of a resident’s death (Q17) and felt more confident dealing with family members who are
angry about care (Q13) following the introduction of the mmpc, suggesting the application
of new knowledge and skills
.
Table 8 – Responses to psychosocial questions post mmpc
Question N %
10. I feel comfortable talking to residents about dying Yes 19 45.2
No 9 21.4
Sometimes 14 33.3
11. I feel confident discussing death with resident’s families # Yes 15 36.6
No 12 29.3
Sometimes 14 34.1
13. I feel confident about dealing with family members who are angry Yes 17 41.5
No 13 31.7
Sometimes 10 24.4
14. I feel confident talking with residents and relatives when there is conflict Yes 10 24.4
- 46
No 18 43.9
Sometimes 13 31.7
15. I feel confident dealing with situations in which there are differing opinions Yes 18 43.9
No 10 24.4
Sometimes 13 31.7
17. I feel able to support families at the time of a resident's death Yes 30 73.2
No 0 0
Sometimes 11 26.8
# Indicates statistically significant difference pre mmpc and post mmpc
Table 9 indicates there was a statistically significant difference for staff being able to
reflect on what could be done to improve care (Q22). A statistically significant difference
was also found for Q20 however this indicates those staff completing the post mmpc
questionnaire felt that the clinical team does not work together with the family as much as
those who completed the pre mmpc questionnaire. This difference may be due to the
differences in sample size, differences in professional levels of staff completing the pre
and post questionnaires, response to acquiring knowledge but still lacking confidence in
applying it or education raising awareness of how it could be done better.
Table 9 – Responses to organisational questions post mmpc
QUESTION N %
2. I believe my opinion is valued when discussing care of dying residents Yes 20 47.6
No 10 23.8
Sometimes 12 28.6
3. I feel valued as a team member caring for dying residents Yes 22 52.4
No 6 14.3
Sometimes 14 33.3
12. There is a process for me to follow if I feel uncertain about care Yes 37 88.1
No 3 7.1
Sometimes 2 4.8
16. I believe that staff are supported following a resident’s death Yes 14 33.3
No 18 42.9
Sometimes 10 23.8
19. The nurses usually agree on care given to terminally ill residents Yes 22 52.4
No 10 23.8
Sometimes 10 23.8
20. When caring for a terminally ill resident, doctors, nurses and Yes 13 31
families work together #
No 9 21.4
Sometimes 20 47.6
21. After a resident's death the nurses and care workers talk about what Yes 9 21.4
we did well
No 20 47.6
Sometimes 13 31
22. After a death, we talk about what could be done better # Yes 11 26.2
No 23 52.4
Sometimes 9 21.4
Table 10 indicates a statistically significant difference in knowledge for three questions

(Q7, Q9, Q23) related to clinical management skills. While for Q7, this difference
indicated an increase in knowledge after the introduction of the mmpc, for the questions
related to perception of pain management and speaking to General Practitioners regarding
symptoms less respondents answered positively. Similar to the results discussed from
Table 9, this difference may be due to the differences in sample size and the professional
levels of staff completing the pre and post questionnaires. Traditionally ENs and AINs
would not speak directly to GPs but relay information through the RN. The response to the
- 47
pain management question may also indicate a raised awareness of pain due to the
education and research and may counter intuitively be a good result.
Table 10 – Responses to clinical management questions post mmpc
QUESTION N %
1. I am confident when discussing with others my assessment of a resident's Yes 25 59.5
symptoms
No 3 7.1
Sometimes 14 33.3
4. I have received extra training to help me care for dying residents Yes 23 56.1
No 16 39
Sometimes 2 4.9
5. My knowledge of the process of dying is good Yes 29 69
No 4 9.5
Sometimes 9 21.4
6. I always put the resident’s quality of life before routine nursing practice Yes 38 92.7
No 1 2.4
Sometimes 2 4.9
7. It is essential that dying residents are turned every 2-3 hours # Yes 5 12.2
No 31 75.6
Sometimes 5 12.2
8. I am reluctant to use morphine for dying residents who don't have cancer Yes 2 6.3
No 29 90.6
Sometimes 1 3.1
9. Pain is well managed in our organization # Yes 14 34.1
No 12 29.3
Sometimes 15 36.6
18. It is always fully explained to me why treatments are introduced or changed Yes 11 26.8
No 17 41.5
Sometimes 13 31.7
23. I am comfortable explaining resident's symptoms to GPs # Yes 11 28.2
No 21 53.8
Sometimes 7 17.9
24. I am competent setting up a Graseby pump Yes 5 12.8
No 31 79.5
Sometimes 3 7.7
25. I am confident converting one analgesic drug to another Yes 7 18.9
No 28 75.7
Sometimes 2 5.4
Responses to the PCQN questions
Table 11 indicates the responses to the 17 PCQN questions. For only one question (Q5)
was there a statistically significant improvement in knowledge regarding the use of
morphine as the standard to compare other analgesics.
Differences in correct responses are illustrated by the bar chart in Figure 4.
- 48
Table 11 - Responses to the PCQN questions post mmpc
Correct Answer N %
1. Palliative Care is appropriate only in situations where there is evidence F 25 59.5
of a downhill trajectory
2. It is crucial for family members to remain at the bedside until death F 27 65.9
occurs
3. The provision of palliative care requires emotional detachment F 28 66.7
4. The philosophy of palliative care is compatible with that of aggressive T 3 7.1
treatment
5. Morphine is the standard used to compare the analgesic effect of other T 14 38.9#
opioids
6. The extent of the disease determines the method of pain treatment F 14 34.1
7. Adjuvant therapies are important in managing pain T 24 57.1
8. During the last days of life, the drowsiness associated with electrolyte T 14 34.1
imbalance may decrease the need for sedation
9. Drug addiction is a problem when morphine is used on a long term basis F 21 50
for the management of pain
10. Individuals who are taking opioids should also follow a bowel regime T 27 64.3
11. Drugs that can cause respiratory depression are appropriate for the T 10 24.4
treatment of severe dyspnoea
12. Suffering and physical pain are synonymous F 13 32.5
13. The use of placebos is appropriate in the treatment of some types of F 21 51.2
pain
14. In high doses, codeine causes more nausea and vomiting than T 16 40
morphine
15. Pethidine is not an effective analgesic in the control of chronic pain T 12 29.3
16. Manifestation of chronic pain are different from those of acute pain T 21 51.2
17. The pain threshold is lowered by anxiety or fatigue T 16 38.1
Figure 4 - Correct responses to the PCQN questions prior to and following

the introduction of the mmpc
100
90
80
70
60 Pre
mmpc
% 50
40 Post
mmpc
30
20
10
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Question
- 49
PHASE THREE
A profile of residents who participated in the mmpc
The following results summarise the demographic and clinical profile of the 17 residents
and their families who participated in the mmpc. Data related to the introduction of the
mmpc was collected from 1st February 2005, until the death of the resident or the end of
the data collection period (31st October 2005), whichever came first.
Of these 17 residents, 9 (53%) died during the introduction of the mmpc. All deaths
occurred within the RACFs.
Time in residential care
The length of time residents had been in the facility prior to participation in the study
varied greatly. One resident had been in the facility for 44 years, while at the other
extreme a resident had been in the facility only 35 days. Because of this variation, the
median length of time in facilities is reported in Table 12.The median length of time in the
facilities for residents who died during the introduction of the mmpc was 4.6 years which
is greater than those who did not die (2.5 years) although this difference is not statistically
significant.
Table 12 - Average length of stay for study residents in the facility prior to
the mmpc
Median number of Years in facility

All residents (n=17) 2.8
Residents who didn’t die (n=8) 2.5
Residents who died (n=9) 4.6
Age and Gender
The average age of the residents in the sample was 82 years. The youngest resident in the
study was 59 yrs of age and the oldest was aged 107 years. Thirteen (76.5 %) residents
were female.
Marital Status
Seven (41.2%) of the residents were widowed, 6 (35.3%) were married, 1 (5.9%) was
divorced and 3 (17.6%) were never married.
Country of Birth
Australia was the country of birth for 14 (82.4%) of residents, with 1 resident born in
South Africa, India and the United Kingdom respectively.
- 50
Resident Classification Scale
All residents were classified as highly dependent, with 76.5% in the two highest Resident
Classification categories (Table 13).
Table 13 – Residents’ Classification Category
RCS Category N %
1 3 17.6
2 10 58.8
3 4 23.5
Total 17 100
Palliative Care Phase
The Palliative Care Casemix Classification (Eagar 1997) was used to assess residents at
initial and then each subsequent assessment. This classification is based on the premise
that palliative care can be divided into a number of Phases of Care which are clinically
meaningful. There are 5 phases (see Table 14). At initial assessment no residents were
classified in the terminal phase, 7 (41.2%) were considered stable and 10 (58.8%) were
considered deteriorating. Of these 10 residents, 7 (70%) died during the introduction of the
mmpc, with a median time of 41 days, however the range was from 13 days to 180 days.
Table 14 - Palliative Care Casemix Classification Definitions
Phase Definition
Unstable Unexpected or unplanned problems resulting in change in
management
Stable All residents not classified acute, deteriorating, terminal
Deteriorating The development of new, expected problems not requiring a
change in management, but not in terminal phase
Terminal Death likely in a matter of days, no acute interventions
Nutrition and hydration
No residents were receiving artificial hydration at the commencement of the mmpc, and 5
(30%) were on fluids that were thickened to manage swallowing difficulties. Only one
resident received subcutaneous fluids for hydration prior to death (Table 15).
Table 15 - Hydration status for study residents at initial assessment
Fluid consistency Definition N %

Category 1 Cannot be drunk through a straw or cup, 11 64.7
spoon required
Category 2 Cannot be drunk through a straw but can be 1 5.9
drunk from a cup
Category 3 Can be drunk through a Straw, or cup 4 23.5
- 51
Nil orally 1 5.9
Artificial hydration Subcutaneous fluids 0 0
Total 17 100
Only 1 resident was not taking any food or fluids orally at the commencement of the
mmpc. No residents were receiving artificial nutrition at the commencement of the mmpc
and for no residents was this commenced during the mmpc (Table 16).
Table 16 - Nutrition status for study residents at initial assessment
N %
Full diet 2 11.8
Soft diet 7 41.2
Pureed diet 7 41.2
Nil Orally 1 5.9
Artificial feeding (PEG, NG) 0 0
Total 17 100
Mental State and Behavioural Problems
All residents were assessed as disorientated on initial assessment and only 1 resident was
semi-conscious on entry to the study. Residents exhibited a range of behavioural problems
at initial assessment. The main behaviours were being uncooperative or resistive, being
verbally aggressive or verbally disruptive (Table 17).
Table 17 - Behavioural problems for study residents at initial assessment
N %
Uncooperative/resistive 10 58.8
Verbal aggression 6 35.3
Verbally disruptive 6 35.3
Physical aggression 5 29.4
Demanding 2 11.8
Skin Integrity
Only a small number of residents had problems with skin integrity at initial assessment.
Table 18 - Skin integrity for study residents at initial assessment
N %
Pressure Areas 3 17.7
Wound Care 3 17.7
Skin tears 6 35.3
- 52
Symptom Prevalence
All residents had pain recorded as a possible symptom in their notes, however at initial
assessment no residents were rated by the researchers as in pain using the Abbey Pain
Scale. This result is now viewed with caution as the Abbey Pain Scale has been modified
to measure pain on movement only, not at rest, and in this study it was still used at rest.
Other symptoms were rated as mild, moderate or severe. Table 19 indicates the most
common symptoms experienced by residents at the initial assessment were
weakness/fatigue, dysphagia, anorexia, pruritis/rashes and anxiety. No residents had
dyspnoea or oedema at the initial assessment.
Table 19 – Symptoms for residents at initial assessment
Symptom None Mild Moderate Severe

N % N % N % N %
Dyspnoea 17 100 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oedema 17 100 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nausea 16 94.1 0 0 1 5.9 0 0
Diarrhoea 16 94.1 1 5.9 0 0 0 0
Insomnia 15 88.2 1 5.9 0 0 1 5.9
Depression 15 88.2 2 11.8 0 0 0 0
Oral discomfort 15 88.2 1 5.9 1 5.9 0 0
Vomiting 13 76.5 3 17.6 1 5.9 0 0
Constipation 13 76.5 0 0 3 17.6 1 5.9
Cough 13 76.5 1 5.9 3 17.6 0 0
Restlessness 12 70.6 0 0 1 5.9 4 23.5
Anxiety 10 58.8 2 11.8 1 5.9 4 23.5
Weakness/fatigue 6 35.3 2 11.8 1 5.9 8 47.1
Dysphagia 7 41.2 2 11.8 4 23.5 4 23.5
Anorexia 10 58.8 3 17.6 3 17.6 1 5.9
Pruritis/rashes 10 58.8 2 11.8 4 23.5 1 5.9
- 53
Figure 5 indicates the total percent of residents who were noted to be experiencing these
symptoms at initial assessment. No residents experienced oedema or dysphasia at this
assessment.
Figure 5 - Percentage of residents with symptoms at initial assessment
Oedema
Dyspnoea
Diarrhoea
Nausea
Oral discomfort
Depression
Insomnia
Cough
Constipation
Vomiting
Restlessness
Anxiety
Pruritis/rashes
Anorexia
Dysphagia
Weakness/fatigue
0 20 40 60 80 100
% of Residents with symptom
Symptom Prevalence during the study
Only 4 residents had an Abbey pain score greater than 0, recorded by the researchers at
their assessments. However, on reviewing case notes all residents at some point during the
study had pain as a symptom documented in their notes. Most prevalent symptoms
reported in the case notes for residents throughout the study were weakness/fatigue,
dysphagia, anorexia, pruritis/rashes, restlessness, anxiety, anorexia and vomiting (Table
20 and Figure 6).
- 54
Table 20 - Percentage of residents with symptoms during the study
Symptom N %
Insomnia 0 0
Oedema 1 5.8
Nausea 1 5.8
Diahorrea 1 5.8
Dyspnoea 2 11.7
Depression 4 23.5
Pain 4 23.5
Oral discomfort 4 23.5
Constipation 5 29.4
Cough 5 29.4
Vomiting 7 41.1
Anorexia 7 41.1
Anxiety 7 41.1
Restlessness 9 52.9
Pruritis/rashes 10 58.8
Dysphagia 11 64.7
Weakness/fatigue 15 88.2
Figure 6 - Percentage of residents with symptoms during the study
Insomnia
Oedema
Nausea
Diahorrea
Dyspnoea
Oral discomfort
Depression
Pain
Cough
Constipation
Vomiting
Anxiety
Anorexia
Restlessness
Pruritis/rashes
Dysphagia
Weakness/fatigue
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
- 55
Medication Management
Most residents were on multiple medications. The most common of these were laxatives
such as Coloxyl with senna and Movicol. Twelve residents were on opioid analgesics.
Only 6 (35.3%) of residents were on regular non-opioid analgesia such as Paracetamol and
5 (29.6%) residents were on antibiotics (Table 21).
Table 21 - Regular medications for study residents
N %
Other 15 88.2
Laxatives 12 70.6
Opioids 12 70.6
Tranquilizers 10 58.8
Non-Opioid analgesia 6 35.3
Antibiotics 5 29.4
Antidepressants 4 23.5
Anti-emetics 1 5.9
Of the 12 residents on regular opioids, 10 were also ordered laxatives. Of the five
residents on antibiotics, three were already prescribed these at the initial assessment, for
two of these residents antibiotics were ceased after a fortnight and the third resident died
the following week while on antibiotics. For the other two residents who were commenced
on antibiotics during the study, both were ceased after a fortnight and neither was taking
antibiotics at the time of death. The most common prn (as needed) medications for
residents were laxatives, opioids and non-opioid analgesia (Table 22).
Table 22 - PRN medications for study residents
N %
Laxatives 12 70.6
Non-Opioid analgesia 8 47
Opioids 8 47
Sedatives 5 23.5
Other 5 23.5
Anti-emetics 0 0
Antidepressants 0 0
Antibiotics 0 0
Opioid analgesics
Opioids mostly commonly prescribed on a regular basis during the study were Fentanyl
patches (5 residents), oral morphine mixture (3 residents) and Kapanol (2 residents). Some
residents were on more than one opioid simultaneously.
- 56
Table 23 - Regular opioids prescribed for study residents during the study
N %
Fentanyl patch 3 17.6
Fentanyl patch + oral morphine mixture 2 11.7
Kapanol 2 11.7
Oxycontin 1 5.8
Tramadal 1 5.8
Endone 1 5.8
Morphine mixture oral 1 5.8
Subcutaneous morphine - qid 1 5.8
Subcutaneous morphine via pump 1 5.8
As required (prn) opioids administered were predominantly morphine subcutaneously (5

residents), Endone (2 residents) and oral morphine mixture (2 residents). For the 9
residents who died in the study, 8 residents (88.9%) were on opioids, 6 were on regular
and prn opioids simultaneously, 1 was on regular opioids only and 1 was on prn opioids
only.
Resident profiles
The 17 residents who participated in the mmpc were all long term residents within the
facility and not residents who had been admitted from acute care or transferred from other
settings. The length of stay of these residents provides opportunities for staff to become
familiar not only with the resident’s needs but also the relatives. As the resident’s ability
to communicate diminishes with the progression of the dementia, staff knowledge of the
resident may assist in discerning the resident’s wishes. Only 6 of the 17 residents had
spouses which meant for many of the residents, the relatives were daughters, sons or other
family members. Predicting the final trajectory for residents with end stage dementia is
difficult, however using the palliative care casemix classification the researchers identified
10 of the residents as in the deteriorating phase and seven of these died during the study
period. No residents included in this part of the study were receiving parental nutrition and
no residents were commenced on this during the study period. Artificial hydration by
subcutaneous fluid was provided to one resident in the days prior to death.
Symptoms were recorded from resident’s case files or observation by the researcher at the
time of the assessment. As such, the symptoms recorded largely reflect those symptoms
most commonly noted by nursing staff. Dysphagia was prevalent and this was also
reflected in the range of modified diet and fluids which residents were ordered. Minimal
change in the frequency of symptoms recorded at initial assessment and over the study
period indicated that for these residents the most common symptoms were
weakness/fatigue, dysphagia, pruritis/rashes and restlessness. To reflect the range of
symptoms, residents were on a large variety of medications, with 12 (70.6%) of the
residents on regular opioids at the time of enrolment to the study and 6 of these also being
prescribed prn opioids for breakthrough pain. Of the 12 residents on regular opioids, 10
were also prescribed a laxative. The low rating of pain for residents during the study
(23.5%) indicates that the management of pain was well controlled. Five residents were on
- 57
antibiotics during the study, however only one resident died while on antibiotics. Overall,
symptom management for residents appeared to be appropriate.
Case conference: an example
A key feature of this study was the scheduling of an mmpc case conference for residents
with end stage dementia. For each resident enrolled into the study, the nursing staff
contacted the general practitioner, allied health staff and relevant family members to
arrange an mmpc case conference time. Of the 17 residents in the study, 12 had an mmpc
case conference conducted. Of these 12, 4 died during the study period. To illustrate the
impact of the mmpc case conference a brief overview of the outcome of the mmpc and
subsequent care prior to death are discussed for two residents who both had acute events
and died.
Marjorie
Marjorie was an 84 year old widow who had been in the residential care facility for 5
years. She had a primary diagnosis of dementia and a cerebrovascular accident (CVA)
that had left her with contractures of the left arm. Her daughter lived 2 hours away and
visited infrequently but had frequent phone contact with the facility. Marjorie was non-
verbal in her communication; she had dysphagia and had been assessed by a speech
pathologist for a modified diet. Her food was vitamised and her fluids thickened. On
admission to the study she was only on Oxycontin 20mg twice daily and Panadol prn. She
was classified as being in a stable palliative care phase.
The mmpc case conference
The mmpc case conference was scheduled for 5 weeks after enrolment to the study. Her
daughter was unable to attend the case conference but was happy for this to proceed in
her absence. The staff had discussed with the daughter issues regarding a palliative
approach that would have been discussed at the case conference. The daughter agreed that
a palliative approach was appropriate and although Marjorie did not have an advance
health directive her daughter who had enduring power of attorney had specified she did
not want her mother transferred to an acute hospital and no artificial hydration and
nutrition was to be provided.
The mmpc case conference was attended by Marjorie’s general practitioner, the facility
social worker and five nursing staff members, three registered nurses and two care
workers. There was discussion regarding the daughter’s wishes – ‘for comfort care only’.
Nursing staff indicated that while at present she was in a shared room that if required they
would try and move her to a single room or the palliative care room which they can use
for a few days. The nursing staff felt that at present her pain was well controlled by the
regular Oxycontin and the general practitioner agreed that if she was unable to swallow
oral medication due to deterioration he would provide opioids by an alternative route.
Marjorie had her funeral wishes documented and her family was to be kept informed of
any change in condition.
- 58
An acute event leading to death
Four days after the mmpc case conference Marjorie had a further CVA, became
unresponsive, was unable to swallow and her tongue was protruding. The daughter was
informed of her mother’s condition but at that time preferred not to visit. The general
practitioner was informed and he provided a phone order for subcutaneous morphine
10mg as required every 6 hours. The following day the nursing staff contacted the general
practitioner for an increase in the morphine dose as they felt Marjorie was uncomfortable.
A phone order for 10mg of morphine every 4 hours was provided. The nursing staff
contacted her daughter and informed her that her mother continued to deteriorate. Her
daughter preferred not to visit. On the third day following her CVA Marjorie continued to
deteriorate, she developed a respiratory stridor and had excessive oral secretions. She was
ordered Atropine as required, relocated to the palliative care room and her daughter
informed. Her daughter expressed the wish not to be contacted during the night if her
mother died. Marjorie died at 4am. In the morning the facility social worker contacted the
daughter to inform her of her mother’s death and offer support. The daughter expressed
disappointment that she did not live closer and was unable to be with her. The social
worker note indicates further follow up as required.
Comments regarding palliative care
The nursing staff considered that they had been able to care appropriately for Marjorie as
she was dying. They had kept her daughter informed, provided the physical care she
required and had liaised with the general practitioner by phone to change her oral opioid
to subcutaneous in the absence of a swallowing reflex, and for Atropine to manage excess
secretions. The staff felt they were able to provide Marjorie with some privacy in the last
24 hours by transferring her to the palliative care room. The trajectory of dementia,
particularly complicated by other co-morbidities, is hard to predict. This was
demonstrated in Marjorie’s case as it had not been expected that three days after her
palliative mmpc she would have a CVA and die within three days of this occurrence. This
illustrated to the staff that it is wise not to wait until an acute event to discuss a palliative
approach for residents with end stage dementia.
Attached to the report is an example of a case study, “Paul” that describes in more detail
the management of the care of a resident, using the mmpc. Further case studies are being
written about other participants in the study and will be available at a later date.
Interviews with Bereaved Carers following the introduction of the

mmpc
For the nine residents who died during the prospective study, bereavement interviews
were conducted with seven carers. One resident did not have any living family members
and one family was unavailable for interview.
Interviews were transcribed and analysed thematically by two members of the research
team using NVIVO software. Seven themes emerged.
1. Awareness of what is happening

2. Feeling supported
3. Recognising and managing pain
- 59
4. If he didn’t eat, then he didn’t eat
5. “Can’t I tear it up”
6. Somewhere private for the last few days
7. All of a sudden they’ve gone
Awareness of what is happening
For relatives that had been involved in the study the recognition of the need for a palliative
approach to their relatives care was discussed during the consent procedure and then again
in the mmpc. In this respect, all the relatives in the study were aware that their relative was
in the end stages of dementia often in combination with other co-morbidities.
One relative felt that he had not received adequate information early in the disease,
particularly what the trajectory of care was. He felt that when he was approached to be
involved in a palliative care study that he was relieved to be aware of this:
In palliative care, I knew exactly you’re in the final stages and I thought you know when
there’s only a few weeks to go. (1)
Feeling supported
One carer who stayed overnight as the staff had identified his relative was close to death
commented on how much he felt supported at her death:
Everybody was so kind you know, and the nurses the night she passed away were
absolutely wonderful. They just all came, the whole four of them came, cause there’s only
four nurses on at night time. They made sure I was comfortable and that sort of thing and
her too. (3)
This relative was also pleased with the medical care given:
Even when she passed away the doctor came in at four o’clock in the morning and she
was wonderful. (3)
Recognising and managing pain
Pain was a common symptom mentioned by carers. For one resident, pain was difficult to
control as his pain was primarily on movement. While this resident was on an increasing
dose of regular opioids, breakthrough medication for movement pain was required
frequently throughout the day and night. For this resident, the relatives felt that a more
acceptable level of pain control could have been achieved in the last 24 hours and felt this
may have been because the registered nurse was not comfortable with administering
opioids:
At about 7 o’clock one of the enrolled nurses came in again to see how things were going
and she said ‘I just don’t get this’ and my daughter went out again and said ‘he needs the
morphine’ and the registered nurse said the doctor said I’ve given him as much as he can
have. She didn’t give it again until about 10ish, when she was going off duty at 10.30, and
I reckon she just didn’t want to deal with it, and then he passed away at 7 minutes to 11.
(1)
- 60
One carer expressed that he felt staff had difficulty recognising that his wife was in pain
due to her inability to communicate verbally or with facial expressions. Her husband
would advocate on her behalf but sometimes felt that he was not listened to.
If he didn’t eat, then he didn’t eat
Relatives spoke of the decisions or circumstances around their relative stopping eating and
drinking. For one family, the mmpc case conference was an opportunity to discuss a
change in the resident’s ability to manage food that the family had been providing. The
family welcomed this discussion and were also clear that at the point where he didn’t want
to eat that was okay:
If he didn’t eat, then he didn’t eat…He stopped eating a week before he died (4)
Other relatives were also clear about not having artificial hydration and nutrition:
They said to me ‘she’s not eating anymore’ so I said ‘forget the tube, forget about the
feeding. Enough is enough, she’s suffered, she wants to go. I know she wants to go. The
nurse said to me ‘she’s not taking food anymore’ So I went and had a chat with the senior
nurse and that’s when I sort of decided yes, this is the way to go, the nurse said ‘she’s only
got a few weeks to go (1)
Can’t I tear it up’
One resident had an advance health directive but his wife struggled when it was actually
time to implement it when her husband’s condition changed:
The doctor up there sort of drew me out into the passage and she almost indicated that,
you know, that she didn’t think he was going to be here for much longer and I said ‘can’t
you cancel that (referring to the written advance health directive), can’t I tear it up’ I
know that we both had agreed on that long before, so I knew but it’s quite hard though …
I mean when you’re filling in that form you think that, and I think that I know I wouldn’t
want to be kept alive on any kind of support system at all if I knew that there was no
hopes. So that we understood that perfectly. But you know it’s fine to write it down and fill
it in, but when it actually comes to the nitty gritty, and you’re faced with that thing it’s
quite hard. But I knew that’s what he wanted anyway cause we’d agreed on it long before.
(6)
All of a sudden they’ve gone
Two of the residents’ families did not live in the metropolitan area and they chose not to
visit in the final few days or after the death of their relative. Other members of families
who lived locally coped in different ways. The daughter of one of the residents had
difficulty with coping with her fathers impending death and preferred to stay at home. She
chose not to visit the RACF after his death although she was able to attend the funeral.
Relationships between the staff and family members where their relative has been in the
RACF for a long time became very important. One carer commented
- 61
It’s like you’ve lost members of your family, all those people become really important to
you, all of a sudden they’ve gone. (4)
Another relative spoke about trying to adjust to life after his wife had died. He had visited
everyday for many years:
You really want, as though you’re back in the normal rhythm. You feel as though you’ve
been outside for so long you just want to get back to normal. (1)
Somewhere private for the last few days
In contrast to the pre mmpc bereavement interviews no mention was made regarding
privacy issues. While two of the residents were in a single room, 3 of the other 7 residents
were moved into a single room designated as the ‘palliative care room’ in the 24-48 hours
prior to death. These were all residents who had been in 4 bed-share rooms. Residents who
died in two-person shared rooms were not relocated. Family members did not make
comment about the need for more privacy with their relatives.
Impact of the mmpc for general practitioners
Both general practitioners that participated in the mmpc felt that the mmpc case
conferences were very useful and that it improved dialogue between carers, nursing staff
and family. However, one general practitioner felt the process was a bit formalised and
goals could have been a bit briefer. While the goal was to conduct the mmpc case
conferences over a twenty minute period per resident in one facility some conferences did
exceed this time. Overall, the feeling was the introduction of a palliative approach for
residents with end-stage dementia was a very positive step forward and also raised the
awareness with staff regarding pain management and the futility of active treatment.
Impact of the mmpc on residential staff
The impact of the mmpc on staff has already been discussed in terms of changes in
knowledge, skills and attitudes as assessed by the pre and post mmpc staff survey. During
the project we also interviewed staff regarding their views on the mmpc. Positive
comments from staff illustrated how the mmpc enhanced the care of residents with end-
stage dementia:
The multidisciplinary model of palliative care:

• Raised awareness within the facility that death and dying are important aspects of care
and should be planned for, integrating as much as possible the resident’s and family’s
wishes
• Provided opportunities for staff to talk more openly about residents who were dying
• Case conferences with the GP and family facilitated conversation about dying and
provided a clear plan of action to follow
• Case conferences provided opportunities for staff to discuss sensitive and sometimes
difficult issues such as hydration and nutrition
• Following the mmpc case conferences there was a perception by staff that there was
increased interaction amongst family members
- 62
• Facilitated the implementation of a palliative care volunteer program in one of the
facilities.
Development of documentation for implementation of the palliative approach
While there were positive outcomes from the mmpc also highlighted were a number of
issues that we had not specifically included or addressed in the mmpc. These issues were
mainly concerning policy and procedural issues for implementing a palliative approach. In
particular staff identified the need for:
1. A consistent palliative care policy

2. A generic palliative care plan
3. The ability to audit the charts of residents who had died to assess whether a
palliative approach had been possible
As the research project drew to a close discussions took place with staff about
documentation that could support the continued implementation of the palliative approach.
In discussion with the research staff, present documentation was amended or rewritten.
Attached as Appendices 10 – 13 are the five pieces of documentation seen as necessary for
such implementation –
• the palliative approach policy;
• flow chart;
• care plan;
• work instruction
• audit tool.
All these pieces of documentation will be further refined by the research team.
An application for further research monies has been made to test these tools, and re-test
the implementation plan.
The audit tool is being tested for face validity by colleagues in Western Australia.
- 63
DISCUSSION
Awareness of the palliative needs of people living in RACFs has grown in developed
countries in the last 20 years, in particular the development of a national three year End-
of-Life Programme in the United Kingdom and the Guidelines for a Palliative Approach in
Residential Aged Care Facilities (Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing
2004) in Australia.
The present study aimed to develop, implement and evaluate a multidisciplinary model of
care for residents with end-stage dementia. Multidisciplinary care for residents in RACFs
varies depending on the residents’ needs and access to care providers. Members of the
multidisciplinary team should where possible include the resident and family, staff of the
facility, general practitioner, relevant allied health professionals, volunteers and external
medical or nursing specialists. This study was conducted in the context of a dynamic
health care system. At the commencement of the study guidelines for a palliative approach
in residential aged care facilities (Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing 2004)
had been developed but the national dissemination of these guidelines had not
commenced. Despite this, the guidelines were central to the development of the model of
multidisciplinary care for residents with end-stage dementia in this study.
In addition to the incorporation of these guidelines other developments within the

Australian health system have supported the role of general practitioners providing
comprehensive care planning in RACFs. Specifically, these developments provided
financial incentives under the Enhanced Primary Care scheme for general practitioners to
conduct multidisciplinary case conferences in RACFs (Commonwealth Department of
Health and Aged Care 2006). The utility and acceptability of GPs participating in
multidisciplinary case conferences for patients referred to specialist palliative care
services has been evaluated by Mitchell (2005). He argues that case conferences between
GPs and specialist palliative care services improved the level of information exchange
particularly with regard to discharge planning.
In the present study, case conferences that included the multidisciplinary team, family and
general practitioner provided opportunity to discuss the palliative approach for residents
with end stage dementia. Issues discussed included pain and symptom management,
nutrition and hydration, spiritual care and anticipatory grief of the family. Evaluation
from family, residential care staff and general practitioners indicated that the
multidisciplinary palliative case conference provided opportunity to discuss a clear plan
of care for the resident and ensure that the resident and families wishes were documented.
In this study two validated measures the SWC- EOLD and the SM-EOLD were utilised in
an attempt to evaluate the mmpc. Quantification of relatives satisfaction with end-of-life
care and quantification of symptoms is difficult and the SWC-EOLD and SM-EOLD
developed by Volicer, Hurley and Blasi (2001) did not provide sufficient level of detail to
adequately describe the experience and allow comparisons before and after the mmpc.
While it is acknowledged that lack of change was influenced by an inadequate sample
size, intuitively it was clear that the rich qualitative experience discussed in the relative
interviews was lost in having to categorise components of care.
- 64
CONCLUSIONS
This study has illustrated the potential positive contribution of providing a structured
multidisciplinary palliative approach for residents with end-stage dementia. While further
refinement and evaluation of this model is required the commitment of staff to
development of a palliative approach policy and supporting documentation is
encouraging.
The research team has a number of suggestions for how the provision of a
multidisciplinary approach for residents with end-stage dementia in all facilities in
Australia can be achieved:
7. A multidisciplinary model of palliative care for people in the late-stages of

dementia is a best practice approach
8. An education program for staff is required within RACFs to become skilled in

facilitating an mmpc and case conferencing.
9. Continued education for all levels of staff based on the palliative care guidelines
will be needed
10. Provision within RACFs for staff to discuss the care provided to residents who
have died including what was done well and what could have been improved
assists in continuing improvement
11. The documentation for the mmpc and palliative care case conferencing developed
in this research be further validated and trialled
12. RACFs to undertake regular audits of palliative and end-of-life care to identify
practices that require improvement in addition to those which are providing desired
outcomes.
- 65
Appendix 1 – The Symptom Management at the End-of-Life Dementia Scale
SM-EOLD
Once a 2 or 3 Once a
Item Never month days/month week
Pain
Shortness of
breath
Skin breakdown
Calm
Depression
Fear
Anxiety
Agitation
Resistive to care
- 66
Appendix 2 – The Satisfaction with Care at the End-of-Life Dementia Scale
SWC-EOLD
Strongly Strongly
agree Disagree Agree Agree
I felt fully involved in all decision making
I would probably have made different
decisions if I had had more information
All measures were taken to keep my care
recipient comfortable
The health care team was sensitive to my
needs and feelings
I did not really understand my care recipients
condition
I always knew which doctor or nurse was in
charge
I feel that my care recipient got all necessary
nursing assistance
I felt that all medication issues were clearly
explained to me
My care recipient received all treatments or
interventions that he or she could have
benefited from
I felt my care recipient needed better medical
care at the end of his or her life
- 67
Appendix 3 – mmpc Pro forma
CASE CONFERENCE NURSING REVIEW

A Structured Palliative Care Approach for Residents with Dementia
Resident’s name_____________________________________________________________
Family/POA_____________________________________________
Short history since admission

___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
NUTRITION AND SWALLOWING
Current status
Full diet
Full/Soft/Pureed diet
Thin/Cat 3/Cat 2/Cat 1
Artificial feeding/hydration
Nil orally
Difficulty with swallowing Yes No

Weight gain (last 6months)More than Yes No
5kg
Weight loss (last 6 months)More than 5kg Yes No
If difficulty swallowing describe interventions or plan
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
- 68
INFECTIONS
Number of infections in last 12 months (or since admission)
Number in last Treated with Not treated with

12 months antibiotics antibiotics
Chest infection
Urinary infection
Other infections -
specify
Comments
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
BODY BREAKDOWN
Pressure areas Yes No

Wound care Yes No
Skin tears Yes No
Peripheral circulation limited Yes No
Comments
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
MAIN CO-MORBIDITIES AND SYMPTOMS
Problem Main concerns Pharmacological Non-pharmacological

interventions interventions
- 69
Comments
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
List Relevant Regular Medications administered in the last 48 hours
Code Medication Route Dose Frequency
Relevant PRN Medications administered in the last 48 hours

Code Medication Route Dose Frequency No of doses**
Comments (include difficulty in administration)

___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
- 70
ADVANCE CARE PLANNING
Evidence of an Advance directive

Yes No Date completed, relationship (if
applicable)
Enduring Power of Attorney
Advance Health Directive

Funeral wishes documented
Summary of resident’s wishes if documented
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
Summary of family expressed wishes if documented
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
SERVICE PROVIDERS INVOVLED
Indicate members of the multidisciplinary team that you feel need to be invited to attend
the mmpc
Date of last visit Invite to mmpc

Allied Health Staff
Yes No
Physiotherapist
Occupational Therapist
Speech Pathologist
Continence Nurse Advisor
Podiatrist
Diversional Therapist
Dietitian
Pastoral care
Palliative Care service
Other External services
Other
Other
- 71
SUMMARY LIST OF CARE PLAN PROBLEMS
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
IDENTIFIED GOALS TO BE DISCUSSED AT mmpc
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
- 72
Appendix 4 – Assessment of residents’ care
INITIAL ASSESSMENT
Entered in Database
Study ID number: __________ Initial Ax Date: _________ Facility admission date: ________________
Facility: ____________________________________________ Level of care Low Care / High Care
Surname:___________________________ Given Names: _______________________ Title:_________
1. Male 2. Female Birthdate: _________________ Age______________
Marital Status: 1. married 2. de facto 3. widowed 4. divorced 5. separated 6. never
Country of birth:_______________ Identifies as: _____________________________________________
Relative’s Name: __________________________________ Relationship: _______
Address:
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Phone (h) ________________________ (w) ____________________ (m)

_____________________________________
General Practitioner: Name: ___________________________________Phone: __________________
Address:
_______________________________________________________________________________________
List 5 main diagnoses:
Diagnosis Code
Relevant History:
________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
RCS Classification: __________________________________ Date of Classification: ______________
Palliative Care Phase: (tick one box only)
Stable Deteriorating Unstable Terminal
- 73
PHYSICAL ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT
(1) Nutrition
1 Full diet 6 Cat 2

2 Soft diet 7 Cat 3
3 Pureed diet 8 Artificial feeding
4 Thin diet 9 Artificial hydration
5 Cat 1 10 Nil orally
(2) Behavioural Problems (tick appropriate number)

Verbal aggression 1 Yes 2 No Demanding 1 Yes 2 No
Physical aggression 1 Yes 2 No Uncooperative/resistive 1 Yes 2 No
Verbally disruptive 1 Yes 2 No
(3) Mental State (tick appropriate number)
Orientation in time & place 1 orientated 2 disorientated 3 unable to assess

Level of consciousness 1 conscious 2 semi-conscious 3 unconscious
(4) Skin integrity

Pressure areas 1 Yes 2 No
Wound care 1 Yes 2 No
Skin tears 1 Yes 2 No
WATERLOW SCORE ________ DATE ASSESSED _______
(5) Other Initial assessment only

Vision difficulties 1 Yes 2 No
Hearing difficulties 1 Yes 2 No
(6) Pain Assessment
Abbey Pain Score OR Other pain scale score (provide details)

1. Vocalisation ________
2. Facial expression ________
3. Change in body language ________
4. Behavioural change ________
5. Physiological change ________
6. Physical changes ________
TOTAL Abbey Pain Score_________
If Abbey Pain Score 3 or greater OR other pain scale indicates pain, assess
interventions and effectiveness
- 74
_______________________________________________________________________________
(7) Other Unpleasant Symptoms
Evaluate each symptom experienced in last 2 weeks:

0=none 1=mild 2=moderate 3=severe
1. Nausea ___________ 5. Weakness/fatigue______ 9. Mouth ulcers___________ 13. Constipation________

2. Vomiting _________ 6. Dysphagia___________ 10. Oral discomfort________ 14. Diarrohea___________
3. Dyspnoea_________ 7. Anorexia____________ 11. Pruritus/rashes__________ 15. Cough_____________
4. Insomnia _________ 8. Depression __________ 12. Anxiety _______________ 16. Restlessness ________
17. Resistance to food______
Any other symptoms: (details)
For every unpleasant symptom with a score of 2 or 3, assess interventions and

effectiveness
_______________________________________________________________________________________
(8) List ALL Regular Medications
Code Medication Route Dose Frequency
(9) PRN Medications **administered in the previous 2 weeks

Code Medication Route Dose Frequency No of doses**
Comments:
_______________________________________________________________________________________
EXTERNAL SERVICE PROVIDERS

(10) Pattern / level of General Practitioner Involvement:
Case conference completed Date of conference
1 Yes 2 No
How often does the GP visit: 1. Weekly 2. Fortnightly 3. Monthly 4. Six weekly
Comment on date and notes of last GP

visit:____________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________
- 75
(11) Details of the Palliative Care Service Consultancy in Resident’s Care:
Name of PC
Service
Date of
Referral
Reasons for
referral
Visit dates Actions taken Comments re appropriate care

of PC team
ADVANCE CARE PLANING

(12) Assessment and Care Planning (obtain photocopy if possible)
Evidence of an Advance directive
Yes No Date completed, relationship (if
applicable)
Enduring Power of Attorney
Advance Health Directive

Funeral wishes documented
Comments:
PSYCHOSOCIAL
(13) Cultural and spiritual
Are there any cultural or spiritual requirements of the resident and family that have been are
identified and documented: 1. Yes 2. No
Detail:
_______________________________________________________________________________
Is there evidence the staff have met these identified cultural needs: 1. Yes 2. No
- 76
Comment:
______________________________________________________________________________
(14) Family involvement
Comment on the extent/nature of the family involvement/presence in last 2

weeks___________________
Prompt questions
1. What things has the resident been talking about
2. What are the family talking about
3. How are you (resident or family member) thinking about what’s ahead
(15) Intimacy/relationships
Are there any intimacy/relationship needs identified 1. Yes 2 No
Is there evidence that staff have meet intimacy/relationship needs 1. Yes 2. No

_
Any other comments regarding events in the past 2
weeks:_______________________________________
- 77
FORTNIGHTLY ASSESSMENT
(May also be used for change in condition)
Entered in Database
Assessment: 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 (tick) Date________ Study ID Number______

Resident’s
Name_________________________________________________________________________
Facility________________________________________________________________________
__________
Has site of care changed since last assessment? 1. Yes 2. No If ‘YES’ indicate current site of care:
2. Public Hospital 3. Private Hospital 4. Hospice 5. Aged Care Facility - different
care level
7. Another Aged Care Facility
(Details
please):________________________________________________________________________________
Date of Transfer:_________________ Date of discharge from new site: (if

applicable)_______________________
Main Reason for Transfer:

1. rapid deterioration 5. Condition stabilised/improved 9. Terminal care
2. symptom management 6. Desire for care at ‘current site’ 10. Family request
3. increased nursing need 7. Investigation & active treatment 11. Other
______________________
4. GP request 8. Acute event:_________________
Movement in the Aged Care Facility

Has resident been moved within the same aged care facility due to deterioration? 1. Yes 2. No
If ‘Yes’ record
details:_____________________________________________________________________________
Palliative care phase

Stable Deteriorating Unstable Terminal
Has the resident been re-classified within the aged care facility due to deterioration: 1. Yes
2. No
RCS re-classification___________________________ Date of new
classification:________________________
PHYSICAL ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT

(1) Nutrition
1 Full diet 6 Cat 2
2 Soft diet 7 Cat 3
3 Pureed diet 8 Artificial feeding
4 Thin diet 9 Artificial hydration
5 Cat 1 10 Nil orally
- 78
(2) Behavioural Problems (tick appropriate number)
Verbal aggression 1 Yes 2 No Demanding 1 Yes 2 No
Physical aggression 1 Yes 2 No Uncooperative/resistive 1 Yes 2 No
Verbally disruptive 1 Yes 2 No
(3) Mental State (tick appropriate number)
Orientation in time & place 1 orientated 2 disorientated 3 unable to assess

Level of consciousness 1 conscious 2 semi-conscious 3 unconscious
(4) Skin integrity

Pressure areas 1 Yes 2 No
Wound care 1 Yes 2 No
Skin tears 1 Yes 2 No
WATERLOW SCORE ____ DATE ASSESSED_________
(5) PAIN ASSESSMENT

Abbey Pain Score:_________ Other pain assessment score _____________
If Abbey Pain Score 3 or greater OR other pain scale indicates pain, asses
interventions and effectiveness
______________________________________________________________________________
(6) Other Unpleasant Symptoms
Evaluate each symptom experienced in last 2 weeks:

0=none 1=mild 2=moderate 3=severe
1. Nausea ___________ 5. Weakness/fatigue_____ 9. Oedema _____________ 13. Constipation________

2. Vomiting _________ 6. Dysphagia___________ 10. Oral discomfort________ 14. Diarrohea__________
3. Dyspnoea_________ 7. Anorexia____________ 11. Pruritus/rashes_________ 15. Cough____________
4. Insomnia _________ 8. Depression __________ 12. Anxiety _______________ 16. Restlessness ________
Any other symptoms: (details)
If score of 2 or 3, assess interventions and

effectiveness__________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
(7) Regular Medications

Have there been any difficulties with administration of medications in past 2 weeks: 1. Yes
2. No
- 79
If Yes, please indicate: 1. dysphagia 2. Nausea and vomiting 3. Refusal to take 4.
Other________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Have there been any changes to regular medications in past 2 weeks: 1. Yes 2. No
Reason:
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Document any changes to regular medications that have occurred in the past 2 weeks
Medication Date changed Route Dose Frequency Code
(8) PRN Medications **administered in the last 2 weeks
Medication Route Dose Frequency No of doses** Code
EXTERNAL SERVICE PROVIDERS
(9) Pattern / level of General Practitioner involvement in past 2 weeks
How often has the GP visited in the last fortnight: ______________________
Has the frequency of visits changed since the resident became palliative: 1. Yes 2. No
If yes, what difference did the visits make to the resident’s care:
____________________________________________
(10) Palliative care service involvement in the resident’s care in past 2 weeks
Date, reason for visit, action, effectiveness
_______________________________________________________________________________
ADVANCE CARE PLANING

(11) Have there been changes to Advance Directives documentation in the past 2 weeks
1.Yes 2. No
Comments
Has there been a change to the goals of the mmpc 1. Yes 2. No
Comments______________________________________________________________________
- 80
PSYCHOSOCIAL
(13) Cultural and spiritual
Are there any new cultural or spiritual requirements of the resident and family that have been are
identified and documented: 1. Yes 2. No
Detail:
_______________________________________________________________________________
Is there evidence the staff have met these new identified cultural needs: 1. Yes 2. No
Comment:
______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
(14) Family involvement
Comment on the extent/nature of the family involvement/presence in last 2

weeks___________________
Prompt questions
4. What things has the resident been talking about
5. What are the family talking about
6. How are you (resident or family member) thinking about what’s ahead
(15) Intimacy/relationships
Are there any new intimacy/relationship needs identified in the last 2 weeks 1. Yes 2 No
Is there evidence that staff have meet these new intimacy/relationship needs 1. Yes 2. No
Any other comments regarding events in the past 2

weeks:_______________________________________
- 81
Appendix 5 - Preliminary codes for interviews
1. Carer and resident interactions

2. Death – alone/not alone
3. Dissatisfaction with care
4. Movement within the facility
5. Nutrition/hydration
6. Palliative care – recognition
7. Preparation for death – carer
8. Satisfaction with care
9. Symptom management
10. General Practitioners
11. Carer coping
12. Advance directives
13. Movement within the facility
14. Medication issues – carer
15. Spiritual care
16. Dementia knowledge
17. Euthanasia
18. Hospital
19. Privacy
20. Rehearsal for death
- 82
Appendix 6 - Pre – intervention responses to non PCQN questions by professional group
(# significant difference between groups)
RN EN AIN
QUESTION N % N % N %
1. I am confident when discussing with others my assessment of a resident's symptoms #
Yes 45 95.7 17 70.8 50 69.4
No 0 0 0 0 7 9.7
Sometimes 2 4.3 7 29.2 15 20.8
2. I believe my opinion is valued when discussing care of dying residents #
Yes 36 76.6 15 62.5 39 51.3
No 1 2.1 2 8.3 14 18.4
Sometimes 10 21.3 7 29.2 23 30.3
3. I feel valued as a team member involved with caring for dying residents
Yes 39 81.3 18 75 47 61
No 2 4.2 1 4.2 11 14.3
Sometimes 7 14.6 5 20.8 19 24.7
4. I have received extra training to help me care for dying residents
Yes 23 47.9 15 62.5 39 50.6
No 23 47.9 9 37.5 33 42.9
Sometimes 2 4.2 0 0 5 6.5
5. My knowledge of the process of dying is good
Yes 39 81.3 18 75 54 72
No 2 4.2 2 8.3 14 18.7
Sometimes 7 14.6 4 16.7 7 9.3
6. I always put the resident's quality of life before routine nursing practice
Yes 40 85.1 21 87.5 74 96.1
No 1 2.1 0 0 2 2.6
Sometimes 6 12.8 3 12.5 1 1.3
7. It is essential that dying residents are turned every 2-3 hours #
Yes 9 19.1 5 20.8 29 38.7
No 29 61.7 12 50 27 36
Sometimes 9 19.1 7 29.2 19 25.3
8. I am reluctant to use morphine to dying residents who don’t have cancer #
Yes 1 2.1 1 5 5 10.4
No 46 95.8 19 95 36 75
Sometimes 1 2.1 0 0 7 14.6
- 83
RN EN AIN
9. Pain is well managed in our organisation
Yes 19 39.6 8 33.3 33 43.4
No 5 10.4 5 20.8 8 10.5
Sometimes 24 50 11 45.8 35 46.1
10. I feel comfortable talking to residents about dying
Yes 35 72.9 15 62.5 41 53.9
No 3 6.3 3 12.5 12 15.8
Sometimes 10 20.8 6 25 23 30.3
11. I feel confident discussing death with resident's families #
Yes 39 83 10 41.7 35 46.7
No 3 6.4 4 16.7 14 18.7
Sometimes 5 10.6 10 41.7 26 34.7
12. There is a process for me to follow if I feel uncertain about the care of a resident #
Yes 35 72.9 23 95.8 69 92
No 7 14.6 1 4.2 2 2.7
Sometimes 6 12.5 0 0 4 5.3
13. I feel confident about dealing with family members who are angry about care
Yes 20 41.7 9 39.1 24 32
No 11 22.9 9 39.1 21 28
Sometimes 17 35.4 5 21.7 30 40
14. I feel confident talking with residents and their relatives when there is conflict
Yes 18 37.5 6 26.1 17 23
No 13 27.1 11 47.8 33 44.6
Sometimes 17 35.4 6 26.1 24 32.4
15. I feel confident dealing with situations in which there are differing opinions #
Yes 24 50 15 62.5 23 30.7
No 8 16.7 2 8.3 20 26.7
Sometimes 16 33.3 7 29.2 32 42.7
16. I believe that staff are supported following a resident's death #
Yes 13 27.1 7 29.2 37 47.4
No 12 25 10 41.7 22 28.2
Sometimes 23 47.9 7 29.2 19 24.4
17. I feel able to support families at the time of a resident's death
Yes 39 81.3 21 87.5 56 75.7
No 2 4.2 0 0 6 8.1
Sometimes 7 14.6 3 12.5 12 16.2
- 84
RN EN AIN
18. It is always fully explained to me why treatments are introduced or changed
Yes 22 45.8 7 29.2 29 37.2
No 8 16.7 6 25 28 35.9
Sometimes 18 37.5 11 45.8 21 26.9
19. The nurses in our organisation usually agree on care given to terminally ill residents
Yes 28 58.3 12 50 39 50.6
No 8 16.7 3 12.5 15 19.5
Sometimes 12 25 9 37.5 23 29.9
20. When caring for a terminally ill resident, doctors, nurses and families work together
Yes 23 47.9 13 54.2 43 55.1
No 2 4.2 2 8.3 12 15.4
Sometimes 23 47.9 9 37.5 23 29.5
21. After a resident's death the nurses and care workers talk about what we did well #
Yes 8 16.7 5 20.8 28 36.8
No 20 41.7 10 41.7 35 46.1
Sometimes 20 41.7 9 37.5 13 17.1
22. After a death, the nurses and care workers talk about what could be done better #
Yes 4 8.3 5 20.8 21 27.3
No 16 33.3 8 33.3 32 41.6
Sometimes 28 58.3 11 45.8 24 31.2
23. I am comfortable explaining resident's symptoms to GPs #
Yes 45 93.8 14 63.6 21 34.4
No 0 0 4 18.2 24 39.3
Sometimes 3 6.3 4 18.2 16 26.2
24. I am competent setting up a Graseby pump #
Yes 23 47.9 4 18.2 3 5.3
No 21 43.8 17 77.3 52 91.2
Sometimes 4 8.3 1 4.5 2 3.5
25. I am confident converting one analgesic drug to another
Yes 14 32.6 6 27.3 3 5.6
No 18 41.9 13 59.1 46 85.2
Sometimes 11 25.6 3 13.6 5 9.3
- 85
Appendix 7 —Pre – intervention responses to questions from the PCQN by professional group
(# significant difference between groups)
Correct RN EN AIN
Answer
1. Palliative Care is appropriate only in situations where there is evidence of a downhill trajectory F 27 56.3 11 45.8 37 47.4
2. It is crucial for family members to remain at the bedside until death occurs F 37 77.1 18 75 48 62.3
3. The provision of palliative care requires emotional detachment F 41 85.4 19 79.2 42 54.5#
4. The philosophy of palliative care is compatible with that of aggressive treatment T 4 8.5 0 0 3 3.9
5. Morphine is the standard used to compare the analgesic effect of other opioids T 18 38.3 7 31.8 11 17.2
6. The extent of the disease determines the method of pain treatment F 33 71.7 11 45.8 26 34.2
7. Adjuvant therapies are important in managing pain T 41 87.2 13 54.2 35 50
8. During the last days of life, the drowsiness associated with electrolyte imbalance may decrease the T 16 34 6 26.1 9 12.7
need for sedation
9. Drug addiction is a problem when morphine is used on a long term basis for the management of F 42 87.5 16 66.7 35 50#
pain
10. Individuals who are taking opioids should also follow a bowel regime T 44 91.7 18 81.8 45 66.2#
11. Drugs that can cause respiratory depression are appropriate for the treatment of severe T 21 47.7 6 25 16 25
dyspnoea
12. Suffering and physical pain are synonymous F 28 59.6 9 39.1 19 26.4
13. The use of placebos is appropriate in the treatment of some types of pain F 38 80.9 15 65.2 26 40.6
14. In high doses, codeine causes more nausea and vomiting than morphine T 23 50 5 21.7 28 41.2#
15. Pethidine is not an effective analgesic in the control of chronic pain T 24 51.1 7 30.4 17 25.8
16. Manifestation of chronic pain are different from those of acute pain T 30 65.2 14 60.9 32 45.7
17.The pain threshold is lowered by anxiety or fatigue T 30 62.5 13 54.2 19 27.9
- 86
Appendix 8 Post – intervention responses to non PCQN questions by professional group
RN EN AIN
1. I am confident when discussing with others my assessment of a resident's symptoms
Yes 5 83.3 6 60 14 53.8
No 1 16.7 4 40 3 11.5
Sometimes 0 0 0 0 9 34.6
2. I believe my opinion is valued when discussing care of dying residents
Yes 5 83.3 3 30 12 46.2
No 1 16.7 2 20 7 26.9
Sometimes 0 0 5 50 7 26.9
3. I feel valued as a team member involved with caring for dying residents
Yes 4 66.7 3 30 15 57.7
No 0 0 1 10 5 19.2
Sometimes 2 33.3 6 60 6 23.1
4. I have received extra training to help me care for dying residents
Yes 2 40 8 80 13 50
No 3 60 1 10 12 46.2
Sometimes 0 0 1 10 1 3.8
5. My knowledge of the process of dying is good
Yes 3 50 10 100 16 61.5
No 1 16.7 0 0 3 11.5
Sometimes 2 33.3 0 0 7 26.9
6. I always put the resident's quality of life before routine nursing practice
Yes 5 83.3 10 100 23 92
No 0 0 0 0 1 4
Sometimes 1 16.7 0 0 1 4
7. It is essential that dying residents are turned every 2-3 hours
Yes 1 16.7 1 10 3 12
No 5 83.3 7 70 19 76
Sometimes 0 0 2 20 3 12
8. I am reluctant to use morphine to dying residents who don’t have cancer
Yes 0 0 0 0 2 10.5
No 6 100 7 100 16 84.2
Sometimes 0 0 0 0 1 5.3
- 87
RN EN AIN
9. Pain is well managed in our organisation
Yes 3 50 1 10 10 40
No 0 0 3 30 9 36
Sometimes 3 50 6 60 6 24
10. I feel comfortable talking to residents about dying
Yes 3 50 5 50 11 42.3
No 1 16.7 3 30 5 19.2
Sometimes 2 33.3 2 20 10 38.5
11. I feel confident discussing death with resident's families
Yes 2 33.3 4 40 9 36
No 0 0 3 30 9 36
Sometimes 4 66.7 3 30 7 28
12. There is a process for me to follow if I feel uncertain about the care of a resident
Yes 3 50 10 100 24 92.3
No 2 33.3 0 0 1 3.8
Sometimes 1 16.7 0 0 1 3.8
13. I feel confident about dealing with family members who are angry about care
Yes 2 33.3 5 50 10 40
No 1 16.7 3 30 9 36
Sometimes 3 50 2 20 6 24
14. I feel confident talking with residents and their relatives when there is conflict
Yes 1 16.7 4 40 5 20
No 0 0 3 30 15 60
Sometimes 5 83.3 3 30 5 20
15. I feel confident dealing with situations in which there are differing opinions
Yes 3 50 4 40 11 44
No 1 16.7 1 10 8 32
Sometimes 2 33.3 5 50 6 24
16. I believe that staff are supported following a resident's death
Yes 2 33.3 2 20 10 38.5
No 3 50 3 30 12 46.2
Sometimes 1 16.7 5 50 4 15.4
17. I feel able to support families at the time of a resident's death
Yes 4 66.7 8 80 18 72
No 0 0 2 20 0 0
Sometimes 2 33.3 0 0 7 28
- 88
RN EN AIN
18. It is always fully explained to me why treatments are introduced or changed
Yes 3 60 2 20 6 23.1
No 2 40 5 50 10 38.5
Sometimes 0 0 3 30 10 38.5
19. The nurses in our organisation usually agree on care given to terminally ill residents
Yes 6 100 2 20 14 53.8
No 0 0 3 30 7 26.9
Sometimes 0 0 5 50 5 19.2
20. When caring for a terminally ill resident, doctors, nurses and families work together
Yes 3 50 3 30 7 26.9
No 1 16.7 1 10 7 26.9
Sometimes 2 33.3 6 60 12 46.2
21. After a resident's death the nurses and care workers talk about what we did well
Yes 2 33.3 0 0 7 26.9
No 2 33.3 5 50 13 50
Sometimes 2 33.3 5 50 6 23.1
22. After a death, the nurses and care workers talk about what could be done better
Yes 2 33.3 1 10 8 30.8
No 3 50 6 60 13 50
Sometimes 1 16.7 3 30 5 19.2
23. I am comfortable explaining resident's symptoms to GPs
Yes 0 0 4 40 6 23.1
No 5 83.3 4 40 16 61.5
Sometimes 1 16.7 2 20 4 15.4
24. I am competent setting up a Graseby pump
Yes 3 50 3 20 0 0
No 2 33.3 7 70 22 91.9
Sometimes 1 16.7 0 0 2 8.3
25. I am confident converting one analgesic drug to another
Yes 3 50 3 30 1 4.8
No 2 33.3 7 70 19 90.5
Sometimes 1 16.7 0 0 1 4.8
- 89
Appendix 9 —Post – intervention responses to questions from the PCQN by professional group
(* correct response,)
Correct RN EN AIN
Answer
1. Palliative Care is appropriate only in situations where there is evidence of a downhill trajectory F 5 83.3 4 40 16 61.5
2. It is crucial for family members to remain at the bedside until death occurs F 5 83.3 7 70 15 60
3. The provision of palliative care requires emotional detachment F 5 83.3 8 80 15 57.7
4. The philosophy of palliative care is compatible with that of aggressive treatment T 0 0 1 10 2 7.7
5. Morphine is the standard used to compare the analgesic effect of other opioids T 4 66.7 4 40 6 30
6. The extent of the disease determines the method of pain treatment F 4 66.7 4 40 6 24
7. Adjuvant therapies are important in managing pain T 5 83.3 7 70 12 46.2
8. During the last days of life, the drowsiness associated with electrolyte imbalance may decrease the T 2 33.3 5 50 7 28
need for sedation
9. Drug addiction is a problem when morphine is used on a long term basis for the management of F 4 66.7 8 80 9 34.6
pain
10. Individuals who are taking opioids should also follow a bowel regime T 6 100 9 90 12 46.2
11. Drugs that can cause respiratory depression are appropriate for the treatment of severe T 3 50 2 20 5 20
dyspnoea
12. Suffering and physical pain are synonymous F 3 50 4 40 6 25
13. The use of placebos is appropriate in the treatment of some types of pain F 4 66.7 8 80 9 36
14. In high doses, codeine causes more nausea and vomiting than morphine T 3 60 6 60 7 28
15. Pethidine is not an effective analgesic in the control of chronic pain T 4 66.7 3 30 5 20
16. Manifestation of chronic pain are different from those of acute pain T 4 66.7 6 30 11 44
17.The pain threshold is lowered by anxiety or fatigue T 4 66.7 5 50 7 26.9
- 90
Appendix 10 – Policy for a Palliative Care Approach
- 91
Appendix 11 – Palliative Care Plan
- 92
- 93
- 94
- 95
- 96
- 97
Appendix 12 – Work Instruction for a palliative approach
- 98
Appendix 13 – Palliative Care Procedure Flowchart and Audit Tool
- 99
- 100
- 101
REFERENCES
Abbey, J. (1995). Death and late-stage dementia in institutions: a cultural analysis.

School of Nursing, Faculty of Health and Behavioural Sciences. Geelong,
Deakin University.
Abbey, J. (2003). Ageing, Dementia and Palliative Care. Palliative Care Nursing - A
Guide to Practice (Second edition). S. Aranda and M. O'Connor. Melbourne,
Ausmed: 313-326.
Akerlund, B. and A. Norberg (1990). "Powerlessness in terminal care of demented
patients: An exploratory study." Omega 21: 15-19.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) (2006). Residential aged care in
Australia 2004-5: a statistical overview. AIHW. cat no. AGE 45. Aged Care
Statistics Series no 22. Canberra, AIHW.
Barr, F., S. Graham, et al. (2002). "Treatment choices in life threatening illness:
attitudes and preferences of elderly Australian veterans and war widows."
Australasian Journal of Ageing 21(4): 178-184.
Billings, J. (1998). "What is Palliative Care." Journal of Palliative Medicine 1(1): 73-
81.
Cameron, M. (2002). "Older persons' ethical problems involving their health."
Nursing Ethics 9(5): 537.
Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care. (2006). "Multidisciplinary
case conferencing." Retrieved 07/07/06, 2006, from
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/wcms/publishing.nsf/Content/health-epc-
caseconf.htm.
Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing. (2004). "Guidelines for a
palliative approach in residential aged care facilities." from
http://www.apacproject.org.au.
Commonwealth of Australia (2003). Aged Care in Australia. Department of Health
and Ageing. Canberra.
Covinsky, K., C. Eng, et al. (2003). "The last two years of life: transitional
trejectories of frail older people." Journal of American Geriatrics Association
51(4): 492-498.
Davies, E. (2004, 2004). "What are the palliative care needs of older people and how
might they be met? (Health Evidence Network report)." Retrieved 15
January, 2008, from http://euro.who.int/Document/E83747.pdf.
Davies, E., H. I. J, et al. (2004). "Better Palliative Care for Older People." Retrieved
15 January 2008, from http://www/euro.who.int/document/E82933.pdf.
Doyle, C. and S. Ward (1998). "Education and training in residential dementia care in
Australia: needs, provision and directions." Australian and New Zealand
Journal of Public Health 22(5): 589-97.
Eagar, K. (1997). The Australian National Sub-Acute and Non-Acute Patient
Classification (AN-SNAP): report of the National Sub-Acute and Non-Acute
Casemix Classification Study. Wollongong, Wollongong; Centre for Health
Services Development,.
Eun-shim Nam Resnick, B. (2001). "End-of-Life Treatment Preferences among Older
Adults." Nursing Ethics 8(6): 533.
Froggatt, K., K. Poole, et al. (2002). "The provision of palliative care in nursing
homes and residential homes: a survey of clinical nurse specialist work."
Palliative Medicine 16: 481-487.
- 102
Harvey, B. (2006). "Enhanced primary care for people with dementia: the role of the
general practitioner." Retrieved 27th March, 2006, from
http://www.hammond.com.au/resources/b_harvey.pdf.
Hudson, R. and J. Richmond (1994). Unique and ordinary reflections on living and
dying in a nursing home. Melbourne, Ausmed.
Hudson, R. and J. Richmond (2001). "Living Dying Caring: Life and death in a
nursing home."
Jorm, A. and A. Henderson (1993). The Problem of Dementia in Australia. Aged and
Community Care Service Development and Evaluation Reports, No 6. H. a.
C. S. Aged and Community Care Division Department of Health. Canberra.
Maddocks, I., J. Abbey, et al. (1996). Palliative care in Nursing Homes - Report to
the Commonwealth Department of Health and Family Services. Adelaide,
Flinders University.
Maddocks, I., D. Parker, et al. (1999). Palliative care nursing practitioners in
residential aged care facilities - Report to the Department of Health and
Family Services. Adelaide, Flinders University.
Maynard, S. E., J. Whittle, et al. (2003). "Quality of life and dialysis decisions in
critically ill patients with acute renal failure." Intensive Care Medicine 29(9):
1589-1593.
Mitchell, G. (2005). "General practitioner, specialist providers case conferences in
palliative care." Australian Family Physician 34(4): 1-4.
Molloy, D. and G. Guyatt (1991). "A comprehensive health care directive in a home
for the aged." Canadian Medical Association Journal 145(4): 307-11.
Molloy, D., G. Guyatt, et al. (2000). "Systematic implementation of an advance
directive program in nursing homes: a randomized controlled trial." Journal of
American Medical Association 283(11): 1437-1444.
Molloy, D. and Urbanyi (1992). "Two years experience with a comprehensive health
care directive in a home for the aged." Annals of the Royal College of
Physicians Surg Can 25(7): 433-6.
Nahm, E. S. and B. Resnick (2001). "End-of-Life Treatment Preferences Among
Older Adults." Nursing Ethics 8(6): 533-543.
Parker, D., C. Grbich, et al. (2005). "A Palliative Approach or Specialist Palliative
Care? What Happens in Aged Care Facilities for Residnets with a Noncancer
Diagnosis." Journal of Palliative Care 21(2): 80-87.
Shah, S. and M. Lloyd-Williams (2003). "End-of-Life Decision Making - have we
got it right." European Journal of Cancer Care 12(3): 212.
Shanley, E., J. McDowell, et al. (1998). "Evaluation of a course for charge nurses on
caring for people with dementia." Journal of Advanced Nursing 28(3): 532-
539.
Shuster, J. (2000). "Palliative Care for Advanced Dementia." Clinics in Geriatric
Medicine 16(2): 373-386.
Skog, M., M. Grafstrom, et al. (1999). "Change of outlook on elderly persons with
dementia: a study of trainees during a year of special education." Nurse
Education Today 196: 472-79.
Volicer, B. J., J. Brown, et al. (1986). "Hospice approach to the treatment of patients
with advanced dementia of the Alzheimers type." Journal of Geriatric
Psychiatry & Neurology 2(4): 188-195.
Volicer, B. J., A. Hurley, et al. (1993). "Predicting short-term survival for patients
with advanced Alzheimer's disease." Journal of the American Geriatrics
Society 41(5): 535-540.
- 103
Volicer, L. (1997). "Hospice care for dementia patients (editorial)." Journal of the
American geriatrics Society, Editorial 45(9): 1147-1148.
Volicer, L. (2002). "Commentary on Terminal Care for Nursing Home Residents
with Dementia by MS Moss et al." Alzheimers Care Quarterly 3(3): 247-251.
Volicer, L., A. Collard, et al. (1994). "Impact of special care unit for patients with
advanced Alzheimer's disease on patients' discomfort and costs." Journal of
the American Geriatrics Society 42(6): 597-603.
Volicer, L. and A. Hurley, Eds. (2003). Hospice Care for patients with advanced
progressive dementia. New York, Springer Publishing.
Volicer, L., A. C. Hurley, et al. (2001). "Scales for evaluation of End-of-Life Care in
Dementia." Alzheimer Disease & Associated Disorders 15(4): 194-200.
Volicer, L., A. McKee, et al. (2001). "Dementia." Neurologic Clinics 19(4): 867-85.
Volicer, L., B. Seltzer, et al. (1989). "Eating difficulties in patients with probable
dementia of the Alzheimer type." Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry &
Neurology 2(4): 188-195.
- 104

Hospice Final Report

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Hospice Final Report

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

DEVELOP, TRIAL AND EVALUATE A

FINAL REPORT FEBRUARY 2008

Correspondence: Professor Jenny Abbey, Professor of Nursing (Aged Care) |

Professor Jennifer Abbey RN, BN, PhD

Dr Carol Douglas MB., Ch.B, Grad Dip Family Medicine,

Professor Helen Edwards DipAppSc., BA(Hons), PhD, RN, FRCNA

Professor Mary Courtney BAdmin (Accounting), MHP, PhD, FRCNA,

Dr. Deborah Parker BA, M Soc Sci, PhD

Prof Patsy Yates RN, BA, DipAppSci, MSocSc, PhD

Ms Jenneke Foottit RN (General & Mental Health)

Alzheimer’s Disease (AD)

Assistant in Nursing (AIN)

Enrolled Nurse (EN)

General Practitioners (GPs)

multidisciplinary model of palliative care (mmpc)

Palliative Care Nurses Quiz (PCQN)

Registered Nurse (RN)

Residential Aged Care Facilities (RACFs)

SWC-EOLD – Satisfaction with Care at the End-of-Life in Dementia

SM-EOLD – Symptom Management at the End-of-Life in Dementia

STUDY REPORT ......................................................................................................14

This study aimed to develop a structured model of multi-disciplinary palliative care

Phase 2. Provision of an education program for staff and general practitioners on

Phase one: Understanding the quality of the end-of-life experience for

Main findings from this phase:

Phase two: Provision of an education program for staff and general

Face-to-face lectures, CD-ROM lectures, provision of a copy of the guidelines to each

Main findings from this phase:

Main findings from this phase:

This study illustrated the positive contribution of providing a structured multidisciplinary

1. A multidisciplinary model of palliative care for people in the late-stages of

2. An education program for staff is required within RACFs to become skilled in

6. RACFs to undertake regular audits of palliative and end-of-life care to identify

• there is often a progressive worsening of memory resulting in increased confusion

What is Palliative Care for Older People?

Death as a Managed Process

It is this confrontation with limitations and choices that underpins a discussion of

Also important is Molloy’s evidence showing the usefulness of advance directives in

AIMS OF THE PROJECT

For a population of residents diagnosed as being in the end-stage (terminal) of a

1. To develop, trial and evaluate a structured model of multi-disciplinary palliative

Phase 2. Provision of an education program for staff and general practitioners on

Phase 3. Development, trial and evaluation of a model of multi-disciplinary

Resident case note audit

• The research team interviewed relatives/lawfully authorised representative(s) of the

Knowledge of a Palliative Approach

To gauge a change in knowledge of and attitude to the provision of a palliative approach,

1. a palliative approach could be provided in the resident’s familiar surroundings if

Support for implementation:

2. Multidisciplinary case conferencing with the resident, their family, nursing,

The aims of the mmpc case conference were to:

3. Support for nursing staff in the implementation of an mmpc. This included:

Implementation of the model of multidisciplinary palliative care

• Diagnosis of dementia in residential care notes

• The resident had no diagnosis of dementia

Recruitment of residents and families

Case Note Audits – prior to the mmpc

• Of the 25 residents included in the retrospective audit, three (12%) had a

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

• Only 2 (11.8%) of the 17 residents had a written an Advance Health Directive,

Never Once a month 2-3 days month 1 x wk

The SWC-EOLD – prior to the mmpc