BACKGROUND: General Practitioners (GPs) face challenges when providing palliative care, including an ageing, multimorbid population, and falling GP numbers. A 'public health palliative care' approach, defined as "working with communities to improve people's experience of death, dying and bereavement", is gaining momentum. 'Compassionate communities' is one example, with a focus on linking professional health carers with supportive community networks. Primary care is central to the approach, which has been incorporated into United Kingdom GP palliative care guidance. No research to date, however, has investigated GP perspectives of these approaches. Our aim, therefore, was to explore GP perceptions of a public health approach to palliative care, and compassionate communities.
METHODS: GPs working in the United Kingdom were recruited through university teaching and research networks using snowball sampling. Purposive sampling ensured wide representation of gender, level of experience and practice populations. Semi-structured, digitally audio-recorded interviews were conducted with nine GPs. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, and thematic analysis was undertaken, informed by a qualitative descriptive methodology. Interviews continued until data saturation was reached.
RESULTS: Most participants were unfamiliar with the term 'compassionate communities', but recognised examples within their practice. Three major themes with seven subthemes were identified: 1) Perceived potential of compassionate communities, including: 'maximising use of existing community services'; 'influencing health outside of healthcare'; and 'combatting taboo', 2) Perceived challenges of compassionate communities, including: 'patient safety'; 'limited capacity of the community'; 'limited capacity of general practice', and 'applicability of public health to palliative care', and 3) The role of the GP in compassionate communities.
CONCLUSIONS: GPs recognised the importance of the wider community in caring for palliative care patients, however most were unfamiliar with the compassionate community approach. Participants held differing views regarding the application of the model, and the position of general practice within this. Further research into the approach's practical implementation, and exploring the views of other key stakeholders, would help establish the feasibility of compassionate communities in practice, and guide its future application.
BACKGROUND: Palliative care should be holistic, but spiritual issues are often overlooked. General practitioners and nurses working together in PaTz-groups (palliative home care groups) consider spiritual issues in palliative care to be relevant, but experience barriers in addressing spiritual issues and finding spiritual caregivers. This study evaluates the feasibility and perceived added value of a listening consultation service by spiritual caregivers in primary palliative care.
METHODS: From December 2018 until September 2019, we piloted a listening consultation service in which spiritual caregivers joined 3 PaTz-groups whose members referred patients or their relatives with spiritual care needs to them. Evaluation occurred through (i) monitoring of the implementation, (ii) in-depth interviews with patients (n = 5) and involved spiritual caregivers (n = 5), (iii) short group interviews in 3 PaTz-groups (17 GPs, 10 nurses and 3 palliative consultants), and (iv) questionnaires filled out by the GP after each referral, and by the spiritual caregiver after each consultation. Data was analysed thematically and descriptively.
RESULTS: Consultations mostly took place on appointment at the patients home instead of originally intended walk-in consultation hours. Consultations were most often with relatives (72%), followed by patients and relatives together (17%) and patients (11%). Relatives also had more consecutive consultations (mean 4.1 compared to 2.2 for patients). Consultations were on existential and relational issues, loss, grief and identity were main themes. Start-up of the referrals took more time and effort than expected. In time, several GPs of each PaTz-group referred patients to the spiritual caregiver. In general, consultations and joint PaTz-meetings were experienced as of added value. All patients and relatives as well as several GPs and nurses experienced more attention for and awareness of the spiritual domain. Patients and relatives particularly valued professional support of spiritual caregivers, as well as recognition of grief as an normal aspect of life.
CONCLUSIONS: If sufficient effort is given to implementation, listening consultation services can be a good method for PaTz-groups to find and cooperate with spiritual caregivers, as well as for integrating spiritual care in primary palliative care. This may strengthen care in the spiritual domain, especially for relatives who are mourning.
Background: Palliative care is an important but often overlooked component of primary care. In Myanmar, early emergence of palliative care is being seen, however no formal community-based services yet exist. Present challenges include resource scarcity and inadequate education and training.
Aim: Our goal was to improve understanding and approach towards palliative care by GPs in Yangon.
Method: An initial survey was performed among 42 GPs in Yangon, Mandalay, and Meiktila in March 2019 demonstrating a gap in current training needs and willingness by GPs for this to be improved. A 2-day workshop, the first ever of its kind, was subsequently designed and held for 20 local GPs, consisting of interactive seminars delivered in Burmese.
Results: Improvement in knowledge and confidence were used as measures of success. A true/false-style quiz was distributed pre- and post-workshop demonstrating a mean total score improvement of 15%. Self-reported confidence rating scores regarding confidence when: 1) managing palliative patients; 2) providing holistic care; and 3) breaking bad news, increased by a mean of 25%.
Conclusion: The greatest outcome from this workshop, by far, was the enthusiasm and awareness it generated, support was even gained from the President of the Myanmar Medical Association despite his initial reservations about developing this area. Ultimately, the workshop behaved as an advocate for the introduction of a regular palliative care lecture into the local Diploma in Family Medicine curriculum; it also spurred a group of GPs to further this work and turn the workshop into a regular teaching event.
Background: General practitioners (GPs) and general practice nurses (GPNs) face increasing demands to provide palliative care (PC) or end-of-life care (EoLC) as the population ages. To enhance primary EoLC, the facilitators and barriers to their provision need to be understood.
Objective: To provide a comprehensive description of the facilitators and barriers to GP and GPN provision of PC or EoLC.
Method: Systematic literature review. Data included papers (2000 to 2017) sought from Medline, PsycInfo, Embase, Joanna Briggs Institute and Cochrane databases.
Results: From 6209 journal articles, 62 reviewed papers reported the GP’s and GPN’s role in EoLC or PC practice. Six themes emerged: patient factors; personal GP factors; general practice factors; relational factors; co-ordination of care; availability of services. Four specific settings were identified: aged care facilities, out-of-hours care and resource-constrained settings (rural, and low-income and middle-income countries). Most GPs provide EoLC to some extent, with greater professional experience leading to increased comfort in performing this form of care. The organisation of primary care at practice, local and national level impose numerous structural barriers that impede more significant involvement. There are potential gaps in service provision where GPNs may provide significant input, but there is a paucity of studies describing GPN routine involvement in EoLC.
Conclusions: While primary care practitioners have a natural role to play in EoLC, significant barriers exist to improved GP and GPN involvement in PC. More work is required on the role of GPNs.
Background: Previous studies suggest that the symptomatology threshold (i.e. the level and types of symptoms) for a referral to specialized palliative care might differ for doctors in different parts of the healthcare system; however, it has not yet been investigated.
Aim: To investigate if the number and level of symptoms/problems differed for patients referred from the primary and secondary healthcare sectors (i.e. general practitioner versus hospital physician).
Setting/participants: Adult cancer patients registered in the Danish Palliative Care Database who reported their symptoms/problems at admittance to specialized palliative care between 2010 and 2017 were included. Ordinal logistic regression analyses were performed with each symptom/problem as outcome to study the association between referral sector and symptoms/problems, controlled for the effect of gender, age, cancer diagnosis and the specialized palliative care service referred to.
Results: The study included 31,139 patients. The average age was 69 years and 49% were women. Clinically neglectable associations were found between referral sector and pain, appetite loss, fatigue, number of symptoms/problems, number of severe symptoms/problems (odds ratios between 1.05 and 1.20, all p < 0.05) and physical functioning (odds ratio = 0.81 (inpatient care) and 1.32 (outpatient), both p < 0.05). The remaining six outcomes were not significantly associated with referral sector.
Conclusion: Differences across healthcare sectors in, for example, competences and patient population did not seem to result in different symptomatology thresholds for referring patients to palliative care since only small, and probably not clinically relevant, differences in symptomatology was found across referral sectors.
Introduction: Older people who live in care homes have a high level of need with complex health conditions. In addition to providing medical care to residents, general practitioners (GPs) play a role as gatekeeper for access to services, as well as leadership within healthcare provision. This review will describe how GPs were involved in initiatives to change arrangements of healthcare services in order to improve quality and experience of care.
Methods and analysis: Following RAMESES quality and publication guidelines standards, we will proceed with realist review to develop theories of how GPs work with care home staff to bring about improvements. We identify when improvement in outcomes does not occur and why this may be the case. The first stage will include interviews with GPs to ask their views on improvement in care homes. These interviews will enable development of initial theories and give direction for the literature searches. In the second stage, we will use iterative literature searches to add depth and context to the early theories; databases will include Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and ASSIA. In stage 3, evidence that is judged as rigorous and relevant will be used to test the initial theories, and through the process, refine the theory statements. In the final stage, we will synthesise findings and provide recommendations for practice and policy-making. During the review, we will invite a context expert group to reflect on our findings. This group will have expertise in current trends in primary care and the care home sector both in UK and internationally.
Background: although patient-centred care has become increasingly important across all medical specialties, when it comes to end of life care, research has shown that treatments ordered are not often concordant with people’s expressed preferences. Patient and family engagement in Advance Care Planning (ACP) in the primary care setting could improve the concordance between patients’ wishes and the healthcare received when patients cannot speak for themselves. The aim of this study was to better understand the barriers faced by older patients regarding talking to their family members and family physicians about ACP.
Methods: In this multi-site cross-sectional study, three free text questions regarding reasons patients found it difficult to discuss ACP with their families or their family physicians were part of a self-administered questionnaire about patients’ knowledge of and engagement in ACP. The questionnaire, which included closed ended questions followed by three probing open ended questions, was distributed in 20 family practices across 3 provinces in Canada. The free text responses were analyzed using thematic analysis and form the basis of this paper.
Results: One hundred two participants provided an analyzable response to the survey when asked why they haven’t talked to someone about ACP. Two hundred fifty-four answered the question about talking to their physician and 340 answered the question about talking to family members. Eight distinct themes emerged from the free text response analysis: 1. They were too young for ACP; 2. The topic is too emotional; 3. The Medical Doctor (MD) should be responsible for bringing up ACP 4. A fear of negatively impacting the patient-physician relationship; 5. Not enough time in appointments; 6. Concern about family dynamics; 7. It’s not a priority; and 8. A lack of knowledge about ACP.
Conclusions: Patients in our sample described many barriers to ACP discussions, including concerns about the effect these discussions may have on relationships with both family members and family physicians, and issues relating to patients’ knowledge and interpretation of the importance, responsibility for, or relevance of ACP itself. Family physicians may be uniquely placed to leverage the longitudinal, person- centred relationship they have with patients to mitigate some of these barriers.
L 'affaire de notre confrère de Normandie mis en cause pour avoir utilisé du midazolam à domicile a agi comme un détonateur. Comme une soudaine prise de conscience du fait que l’on meurt aussi chez soi et que l’on doit pouvoir bénéficier des mêmes soins et accompagnement, quel que soit le lieu.
[Début de l'article]
Background: End of life (EoL) care becomes more complex and increasingly takes place in the community, but there is little data on the use of general practice (GP) services to guide care improvement. This study aims to determine the trends and factors associated with GP consultation, prescribing and referral to other care services amongst cancer patients in the last year of life.
Methods: A retrospective cohort study of cancer patients who died in 2000–2014, based on routinely collected primary care data (the Clinical Practice Research DataLink, CPRD) covering a representative sample of the population in the United Kingdom. Outcome variables were number of GP consultations (primary), number of prescriptions and referral to other care services (yes vs no) in the last year of life. Explanatory variables included socio-demographics, clinical characteristics and the status of palliative care needs recognised or not. The association between outcome and explanatory variables were evaluated using multiple-adjusted risk ratio (aRR).
Results: Of 68,523 terminal cancer patients, 70% were aged 70+, 75% had comorbidities and 45.5% had palliative care needs recognised. In the last year of life, a typical cancer patient had 43 GP consultations (Standard deviation (SD): 31.7; total = 3,031,734), 71.5 prescriptions (SD: 68.0; total = 5,074,178), and 21(SD: 13.0) different drugs; 58.0% of patients had at least one referral covering all main clinical specialities. More comorbid conditions, prostate cancer and having palliative care needs recognised were associated with more primary care consultations, more prescriptions and a higher chance of referral (aRRs 1.07–2.03). Increasing age was related to fewer consultations (aRRs 0.77–0.96), less prescriptions (aRR 1.09–1.44), and a higher chance of referral (aRRs 1.08–1.16) but less likely to have palliative care needs recognised (aRRs 0.53–0.89).
Conclusions: GPs are very involved in end of life care of cancer patients, most of whom having complex care needs, i.e. older age, comorbidity and polypharmacy. This highlights the importance of enhancing primary palliative care skills among GPs and the imperative of greater integration of primary care with other healthcare professionals including oncologists, palliative care specialists, geriatricians and pharmacists. Research into the potential of deprescribing is warranted. Older patients have poorer access to both primary care and palliative care need to be addressed in future practices.
BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) are important providers and coordinators of palliative home care (PHC). Through this double role, their perspectives and their treatment decisions influence PHC fundamentally. This study aims to gain deeper insights into GPs' perspectives regarding PHC in North Rhine, Germany.
METHODS: An explorative, semistructured focus group was conducted with 7 doctors. The researchers performed content analysis. Main topics were GPs' role definition in PHC and GPs' medical activities in PHC.
RESULTS: Participating GPs describe their role in PHC, based on high motivation and positive attitudes toward PHC as a hybrid role: coordinator, provider (mostly in general PHC), and referrer (gateway to palliative care [PC] specialists). According to GPs' medical activity, participants describe moderate expertise, demanding tasks, and elaborate PHC provision for GPs. Participants stressed the importance of PC in GPs' work. But also PC is a small field in general practice. GPs' PHC benefits from the deep trust resulting from the often close and long-term GP-patient relationship. Complexity and bureaucracy of PHC structures as well as the lack of resources and multidisciplinary cooperation are named as barriers for providing PHC. The highest level of care is reached in specialized PHC, which only very few, severely impaired patients need.
CONCLUSIONS: Participating GPs see themselves as important PHC providers as well as referrers and coordinators. Complexity and discontinuity in PC arrangements create challenges for their provision. Therefore, they long for reduced bureaucratic burdens.
Background: Providing end of life care (EoLC) is an important aspect of primary care, which reduces the risk of hospital admission for most patients. However, general practitioners (GPs) seem to have low confidence in their ability to provide EoLC. Little is known about an adequate volume and kind of training in EoLC among GP trainees.
Methods: We performed a before-after comparison in all post-graduate GP trainees who were registered in the vocational training program (KWBW VerbundweiterbildungPLUS). They were offered participation within a two-day seminar focussing on palliative care in 2017. Those who attended the seminar (intervention group I) completed a paper-based questionnaire directly before the intervention (T1) and 6 months after (T2). None-attendees (group C) were also asked to fill out the questionnaire once. The questionnaire covered previous experiences in palliative care, self-assessment of competencies in EoLC in the organisation of patient care as well as in control of symptoms, attitudes towards death and caring for dying patients and questions about GPs’ role in EoLC.
Results: In total, 294 GP trainees (I: n = 219; C: n = 75) participated in the study. Of those, more than 90% had previously gained experience in EoLC mainly during vocational training in the hospital rotation. Around a third had previously gained competencies in EoLC in medical school. Between groups I (T1) and C no significant differences were observed in socio-demographic characteristics, pre-existing experience or overall expertise. At T2, 75% of participants of group I declared they have extended their competencies in EoLC after the intervention and 70% classified the intervention as helpful or very helpful. Overall, they rated their competencies significantly higher than at T1 (p < 0.01). In detail, competencies in organisation of EoLC and competencies in handling of symptoms significantly improved (p < 0.01). Due to the intervention, 66% could reflect their attitudes towards dying, death and grief and 18% changed their attitudes. Group I highlighted palliative care as one of GPs tasks (Likert 4.47/5, SD 0.75).
Conclusions: The intervention fostered personal competencies, understanding and self-confidence in EoLC among GP trainees. This is crucial for the aim to broadly provide EoLC.
Background: General practitioners’ (GPs) play a central role in facilitating end-of-life discussions with older patients nearing the end-of-life. However, prognostic uncertainty of time to death is one important barrier to initiation of these discussions.
Objective: To explore GPs’ perceptions of the feasibility and acceptability of a risk prediction checklist to identify older patients in their last 12 months of life and describe perceived barriers and facilitators for implementing end-of-life planning.
Methods: Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 GPs practising in metropolitan locations in New South Wales and Queensland between May and June 2019. Data were analysed thematically.
Results: Eight themes emerged: accessibility and implementation of the checklist, uncertainty around checklist’s accuracy and usefulness, time of the checklist, checklist as a potential prompt for end-of-life conversations, end-of-life conversations not an easy topic, end-of-life conversation requires time and effort, uncertainty in identifying end-of-life patients and limited community literacy on end-of-life. Most participants welcomed a risk prediction checklist in routine practice if assured of its accuracy in identifying which patients were nearing end-of-life.
Conclusions: Most participating GPs saw the value in risk assessment and end-of-life planning. Many emphasized the need for appropriate support, tools and funding for prognostic screening and end-of-life planning for this to become routine in general practice. Well validated risk prediction tools are needed to increase clinician confidence in identifying risk of death to support end-of-life care planning.
Les causes de rupture du maintien au domicile de personnes en fin de vie sont souvent liées à l’épuisement des proches et au sentiment d’insécurité. L’objectif de cette étude est de connaître les attentes envers le médecin généraliste (MG) de l’aidant principal d’une personne en phase palliative avancée au domicile. Il s’agit d’une étude qualitative sur la base de dix entretiens semi-directifs menés avec un guide d’entretien auprès de proches de personnes décédées. Les enregistrements ont fait l’objet d’une analyse de contenu. Les principales attentes envers le MG concernent sur le plan technique, un ajustement des thérapeutiques ; sur le plan organisationnel, une disponibilité importante ainsi qu’un lien entretenu avec les différents intervenants et les structures notamment de soins palliatifs ; sur le plan relationnel, une écoute et une information sur l’évolution de la maladie ; sur le plan décisionnel, le respect de la volonté du patient. Les résultats sont discutés à partir de trois concepts adaptés au MG, à savoir la capacité d’adaptation de sa pratique et de son savoir-être, l’anticipation des situations d’urgence et de l’évolution de la maladie, et enfin l’assurance d’une continuité des soins qui passe notamment par leur permanence et leur coordination. Les moyens dont dispose le MG paraissent insuffisants pour assurer le maintien à domicile devant la charge que représente un patient en phase palliative avancée. La diffusion de la démarche palliative au domicile et l’optimisation de l’interprofessionnalité auprès des personnes en fin de vie au domicile et de leurs proches sont à développer. L’enjeu est le respect de la demande du patient de mourir à son domicile.
BACKGROUND: Key Information Summaries (KIS) were introduced throughout Scotland in 2013 so that anticipatory care plans written by general practitioners (GPs) could be routinely shared electronically and updated in real time, between GPs and providers of unscheduled and secondary care.
AIMS: We aimed to describe the current reach of anticipatory and palliative care, and to explore GPs' views on using KIS.
METHODS: We studied the primary care records of all patients who died in 2014 in 9 diverse Lothian practices. We identified if anticipatory or palliative care had been started, and if so how many weeks before death and which aspects of care had been documented. We interviewed 10 GPs to understand barriers and facilitating factors.
RESULTS: Overall, 60% of patients were identified for a KIS, a median of 18 }weeks before death. The numbers identified were highest for patients with cancer, with 75% identified compared with 66% of those dying with dementia/frailty and only 41% dying from organ failure. Patients were more likely to die outside hospital if they had a KIS. GPs identified professional, patient and societal challenges in identifying patients for palliative care, especially those with non-cancer diagnoses.
CONCLUSIONS: GPs are identifying patients for anticipatory and palliative care more equitably across the different disease trajectories and earlier in the disease process than they were previously identifying patients specifically for palliative care. However, many patients still lack care planning, particularly those dying with organ failure.
BACKGROUND: Expert consultation supports general practitioners (GPs) in delivering adequate palliative homecare. Insight into consultation practices from a GP's perspective is needed in order to shape consultation services to their wishes and needs.
AIM: To explore palliative care consultation practices from a GP's perspective.
DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional web-based survey among all GPs (n=235) in the region of Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
METHODS: Our questionnaire contained questions about the delivery of palliative care by GPs, their consultation practices and satisfaction with current services. Questions consisted mainly of 5-point Likert scales. We transformed these scales into numerical values to calculate mean scores. Linear mixed models for repeated measurements were used to study differences in scores.
RESULTS: GPs most often consulted informal caregivers (mean score 3.6) or fellow GPs (mean score 3.3). Physical problems were discussed the most (mean score 3.5), while social and existential issues were discussed least (mean score 1.9 for both). In their choice of a particular consultation service, GPs considered the quality of the provided advice to be the most important factor. GPs were satisfied with current consultation services, with fellow GPs receiving the highest satisfaction scores (mean score 4.6). Finally, when recalling their last palliative patient, most GPs started requesting consultation during this patient's last month of life.
CONCLUSIONS: Next to informal caregivers, GPs preferably seek advice from fellow GPs. Physical issues receive much attention during consultations; however, other vital aspects of palliative care seem to remain relatively neglected, such as social and existential issues and a proactive care approach.
This exploratory study examined general practitioners' (GPs) perspectives on delivering end-of-life care in the New Zealand residential aged care context. A general inductive approach to the data collected from semi-structured interviews with 17 GPs from 15 different New Zealand general practices was taken. Findings examine: (1) GPs' life experience; (2) the GP relationship with the facilities and provision of end-of-life care; (3) the GP interaction with families of dying residents; and (4) GP relationship with hospice. The nature of the GP relationship with the facility influenced GP involvement in end-of-life care in aged care facilities, with GPs not always able to direct a facility's end-of-life care decisions for specific residents. GP participation in end-of-life care was constrained by GP time availability and the costs to the facilities for that time. GPs reported seldom using hospice services for residents, but did use the reputation (cachet) associated with hospice practices to provide an authoritative buffer for their end-of-life clinical decisions when talking with families and residents. GP training in end-of-life care, especially for those with dementia, was reported as ad hoc and done through informal mentoring between GPs.
BACKGROUND: There are no processes that routinely assess end-of-life care in Australian general practice. This study aimed to develop a data collection process which could collect observational data on end-of-life care from Australian general practitioners (GPs) via a questionnaire and clinical data from general practice software.
METHODS: The data collection process was developed based on a modified Delphi study, then pilot tested with GPs through online surveys across three Australian states and data extraction from general practice software, and finally evaluated through participant interviews.
RESULTS: The developed data collection process consisted of three questionnaires: Basic Practice Descriptors (32 items), Clinical Data Query (32 items) and GP-completed Questionnaire (21 items). Data extraction from general practice software was performed for 97 decedents of 10 GPs and gathered data on prescriptions, investigations and referral patterns. Reports on care of 272 decedents were provided by 63 GPs. The GP-completed Questionnaire achieved a satisfactory level of validity and reliability. Our interviews with 23 participating GPs demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of this data collection process in Australian general practice.
CONCLUSIONS: The data collection process developed and tested in this study is feasible and acceptable for Australian GPs, and comprehensively covers the major components of end-of-life care. Future studies could develop an automated data extraction tool to reduce the time and recall burden for GPs. These findings will help build a nationwide integrated information network for primary end-of-life care in Australia.
The Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) will continue to oppose a change in the law on assisted dying, having conducted a survey of its members.
The decision was ratified by the college’s governing council on 21 February. The RCGP said that 6674 members responded to its survey on assisted dying, a 13.47% response rate.
Of those who responded, 47% (3144) said that the RCGP should oppose a change in the law on assisted dying. A further 40% of respondents (2684) said that the RCGP should support a change in the law on assisted dying provided a regulatory framework and appropriate safeguarding processes are in place, 11% (701) said that the college should have a neutral position, and 2% (145) abstained.
Introduction : Soixante pour cent des personnes atteintes de la maladie d’Alzheimer vivent à domicile. Le maintien à domicile a un impact positif sur l’évolution des troubles du malade. L’aidant naturel en est un acteur indispensable, mais le retentissement sur sa santé est majeur. Le médecin généraliste a un rôle d’évaluation et d’anticipation sur le risque d’épuisement de l’aidant, défini par les pouvoirs publics. Un des outils proposés par la Haute autorité de santé (HAS) est la consultation dédiée au cours du suivi des aidants. L’objectif de l’étude était d’évaluer la place de cette consultation dédiée et son contenu en médecine générale.
Matériel et méthodes : Il s’agissait d’une étude épidémiologique descriptive auprès d’aidants de patients atteints de la maladie d’Alzheimer suivis par des médecins généralistes de la Somme, de mai à juillet 2018.
Résultats : 19 médecins généralistes ont participé, ce qui a permis d’interroger 49 aidants. 6,1 % des aidants naturels ont bénéficié d’une consultation dédiée. La mise en place des aides professionnelles est souvent réalisée. L’évaluation du fardeau de l’aidant et l’orientation de celui-ci vers les structures dédiées sont rarement réalisées.
Discussion : L’exploration des besoins et des difficultés en médecine générale dans l’anticipation du risque d’épuisement de l’aidant est nécessaire. Elle permettrait d’apporter des outils adaptés et d’améliorer la prévention du risque d’épuisement de l’aidant, qui met en péril le maintien à domicile du patient.
Conclusion : Le développement d’une approche préventive des aidants et de l’utilisation des aides dédiées à ceux-ci est primordial pour améliorer la qualité de vie du patient et de son entourage.