Although somewhat contested (1), international evidence still suggests that, for most people, home is their preferred place of death and where they want to be cared for when dying from advanced incurable condition (2). The number of people dying at home or in care homes has risen in recent years and is expected to increase in England and Wales by 88.6% and 108.1% respectively by 2040 (3). Families, friends, and residential care staff therefore play a pivotal role in providing care and support to this patient group, although can sometimes lack confidence doing so (4, 5). At times of uncertainty, often as they witness the worrying and unexpected symptoms of disease deterioration or dying, both informal and formal carers call emergency services for urgent help (6–9). Consequently, paramedics and the ambulance service can become the patient’s first point of contact in primary care (10); however, this often leads to more hospital admissions, often against the wishes of the dying person (11, 12). A recent review highlighted that only one study reported data on the percentage of end-of life patients transported to hospital following an emergency call (13). That study found that from 4348 individuals visited by paramedics at the end of life, 74.4% (n = 3237) were transported from home, with the most common destination being a hospital (99.5%, n = 3221) (14).
Despite the frequent call to ambulance services, and a general recognition that this is a key part of their practice, paramedic confidence in their skills and understanding of the appropriate processes for this particular group of patients is variable (12, 15, 16). For example, Kirk et al (17) in their UK survey of 182 paramedics found that 51% reported their end-of-life training as poor, though longer time in service and greater seniority predicted more confidence. Recent reviews have also highlighted the need for training and information (13, 18, 19). Moreover, as well as a recognition of training needs, the input and involvement of paramedics to current end-of-life care guidance and policy is lacking (10).
However, developing interventions to improve practice is challenging, especially when several constraints exist, such as training time and resources. Moreover, previous research has suggested that any intervention implemented needs to be grounded in and informed by paramedic practice for it to be effective (20). A number of interventions aimed at improving paramedic knowledge around end-of-life care and reducing unnecessary hospital admissions have been piloted. These include a specialist palliative care telehealth service for paramedics on call-outs (20), the development of a specific protocol (8) and pathway (21), and a package including a palliative care clinical practice guideline, specific training, and mechanism for sharing of goals of care (22). Additionally Murphy Jones (23) reports on two case studies where comprehensive packages were introduced which targeted a number of areas; while the two interventions developed differed, key similarities were specialist education for the paramedic workforce and the need for consistency in response.
Understanding the theory underlying an intervention is essential in understanding whether, and how, it works. However, current interventions to improve paramedic practice in end-of-life care lack a hypothesised theoretical account of how the interventions will lead to the desired effects. One such approach to intervention development where this is specifically addressed is Theory of Change (ToC) (24). Evidence from projects that have used ToC to develop and evaluate complex health care interventions have shown its potential to strengthen all stages of the intervention process, from development to implementation, and identify the key components and mechanisms of action of complex interventions (24). ToC models are becoming increasingly popular in public health interventions (25) and more recently have begun to be used in palliative care (26).
ToC models describe impact (what the intervention aims to achieve), long-term outcomes (the primary outcomes of the evaluation), and pre-conditions (similar to short-term outcomes) (27). To develop a ToC, stakeholders must work collaboratively to identify how and why they expect an intervention to achieve its intended effect, with the evolving ToC modified throughout the process of intervention development (24, 27). Causal routes generated by stakeholders to explain how an intervention works can also be visually represented through a ToC map (24). The ToC is usually co-constructed with participants in a series of workshops using a backwards-mapping approach, starting from identifying the desired impact of the intervention (i.e. what the intervention should achieve), and then working backwards to identify the preconditions (specific outcomes) and intervention activities required to achieve these impacts. During this process, the assumptions about what needs to be in place for the ToC to occur are made explicit.
The aim of this study was, through building a ToC model, to develop an intervention to improve knowledge and confidence in paramedics when attending dying patients. The building of a ToC model underpinning the intervention would also specify how and why the intervention is expected to work in real-world practice, hence identifying possible barriers and enhancing its implementation potential. It would also indicate how to evaluate effectiveness.