American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine最新文献

Background: Surprise questions (SQs) are used as screening tools in palliative care. Probabilistic questions (PQs) are more accurate than temporal predictions. However, no study has examined the usefulness of SQs and PQs assessed by nurses. Objectives: To examine the accuracy of nurses' SQ and PQ assessments in patients with advanced cancer receiving home palliative care. Design: A prospective single-center cohort study. Setting/Subjects: Adult patients with advanced cancer who received palliative care at home in South Korea between 2019 and 2020. Measurements: Palliative care specialized nurses were asked the SQ, "Would you be surprised if the patient died in a specific timeframe?" and PQ, "What is the probability that this patient will be alive (0 to 100%) within a specific timeframe?" at the 1-, 2-, 4-, and 6-week timeframes at enrollment. We calculated the sensitivities and specificities of the SQs and PQs. Results: 81 patients were recruited with 47 days of median survival. The sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy (OA) of the 1-week SQ were 50.0, 93.2, and 88.9%, respectively. The accuracies for the 1-week PQ were 12.5, 100.0, and 91.3%, respectively. The 6-week SQ showed sensitivity, specificity, and OA of 84.6, 42.9, and 62.9%, respectively; the accuracies for the 6-week PQ were 59.0, 66.7, and 63.0%, respectively.Conclusion: The SQ and PQ showed acceptable accuracy in home palliative care patients. Interestingly, PQ showed higher specificity than SQ at all timeframes. The SQ and PQ assessed by nurses may be useful in providing additional prognostic information for home palliative care.

Background: Patients living with serious illness generally want their physicians to facilitate Goals of Care conversations (GoCc), yet physicians may lack time and skills to engage in these conversations in the outpatient setting. The problem may be addressed by supporting multiple members of the clinical team to facilitate GoCc with the patient while admitted to the hospital.

Methods: A multi-modal training and mentored implementation program was developed. A group of 10 hospitals were recruited to participate. Each hospital selected a primary inpatient unit on which to start the intervention, then expanded to a secondary unit later in the project. The number of trained facilitators (champions) and the number of documented GoCc were tracked over time.

Results: Nine of 10 hospitals completed the 3-year project. Most of the units were general medical-surgical units. Forty-eight champions were trained at the kick-off conference, attended primarily by nurses, physicians, and social workers. By the end of the project, 153 champions had been trained. A total of 51 087 patients were admitted to PACT units with 85.4% being screened for eligibility. Of the patients who were eligible, over 68% had documented GoCc.

Conclusion: A multifaceted quality improvement intervention focused on serious illness communication skills can support a diverse clinical workforce to facilitate inpatient GoCc over time.

Objective: Benefits of integration of palliative care early in the trajectory of a patient's serious illness are well established in the literature. Yet, barriers to palliative care access in the US continue to exist. The purpose of this study is to synthesize existing qualitative data of patient, caregiver, and clinician perceptions of palliative care (PC) that influence PC access and use in the US. Methods: A formal qualitative meta-synthesis was completed. The meta-synthesis included 1) a systematic literature search of qualitative studies conducted from 2016 to 2021, 2) a critical appraisal of the included studies, and 3) a reciprocal translation of the study's findings through an interpretive thematic analysis. Results: Seven articles met inclusion criteria resulting in a sample size of patients (n=18), caregivers (n=15), and clinicians (n=118). Three themes emerged with associated subthemes: knowledge and opinions of PC (subthemes of patient and caregiver knowledge and awareness and clinician knowledge and beliefs); care coordination and collaboration (subthemes of communication and trust); and social and structural drivers (subthemes of socioeconomic demographics and time and resources). Conclusions: This qualitative meta-synthesis identifies barriers and facilitators to palliative care access and use. The study findings illuminate the commonalities and differences of the perceptions of the three key stakeholder groups. In addition, this qualitative meta-synthesis reveals the complexities within the US healthcare system, and the challenges patients and their caregivers face accessing PC.

Background: Palliative care (PC) helps maintain quality of life for seriously ill patients, yet, many Americans lack knowledge of PC.

Aim: To explore the relationships between knowledge of PC of individuals living in north-central Florida and throughout the United States.

Design: This cross-sectional survey with three sampling approaches, one was a community-engaged sample and two were panel respondent samples. Respondents and setting: Respondents of the Florida sample (n₁ = 329) and the community-engaged sample (n₂ = 100), were representative of the 23 Florida county general population. Respondents of the national sample (n = 1800) were adult members of a panel owned by a cloud-based survey platform.

Results: Young adults compared with adults (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.14-2.28, P .007), middle-adults (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.58-3.92, P < .001) and older-adults (OR 3.75, 95% CI 2.50-5.67, P < .001) were less likely to agree that the goal of PC is to help friends and family cope with a patient's illness, and that the goal of PC is to manage pain and other physical symptoms compared with adults (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.20-2.30, P .002) middle-adults (OR 2.58, 95% CI 1.71-3.95, P < .001) and older-adults (OR 7.19, 95% CI 4.68-11.2, P < .001). Participants with greater rural identity (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.31-1.48, P < .001) were more likely to agree that accepting PC means giving up.

Conclusions: Increased knowledge of PC might be influenced through targeting educational interventions and educating the general population through social media use.

Objectives: Determine the association between frailty and immediate survival of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in older Veterans. Secondary outcomes: compare in-hospital mortality, duration of resuscitation efforts, hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, neurologic outcomes, and discharge disposition between frail and non-frail Veterans. Methods: Retrospective cohort study including Veterans 50 years and older, who were "Full Code" and had in-hospital cardiac arrest between 7/1/2017 and 6/30/2020, at the Miami VAMC. Frailty Index for the VA (VA-FI) was used to determine frailty status. Immediate Survival was determined by return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and in-hospital mortality was determined by all-cause mortality. We compared outcomes between frail and non-frail Veterans using chi-square test. After adjusting for age, gender, race, and previous hospitalizations, we used multivariate binomial logistic regression with 95% confidence intervals to analyze the relationship between immediate survival and frailty, and in-hospital mortality and frailty. Results: 91% Veterans were non-Hispanic, 49% Caucasian, 96% male, mean age 70.7 ± 8.5 years, 73% frail and 27% non-frail. Seventy-six (65.5%) Veterans had ROSC, without difference by frailty status (P = .891). There was no difference based on frailty status of in-hospital mortality, discharge disposition, or neurologic outcomes. Frail and non-frail Veterans had resuscitation efforts lasting the same amount of time. Conclusions and Implications: CPR outcomes were not different depending on frailty status in our Veteran population. With these results, we cannot use frailty - as measured by the VA-FI - as a prognosticator of CPR outcomes in Veterans.

Context: While in-person workshops on serious illness communication skills using VitalTalk pedagogy have been shown to have a long-lasting impact, whether changing the format into virtual would maintain its enduring impact is unknown. Objectives. To examine long-term impacts of a virtual VitalTalk communication workshop.

Methods: Physicians in Japan who participated in our virtual VitalTalk workshop were asked to complete a self-assessment survey at 3 time points: before, immediately after, and 2 months after the workshop. We examined self-reported preparedness in 11 communication skills on a 5-point Likert scale at 3 time points, as well as self-reported frequency of practice on 5 communication skills at the pre- and 2-month time points.

Results: Between January 2021 and June 2022, 117 physicians from 73 institutions across Japan completed our workshop. Seventy-four participants returned the survey at all the 3 time points. Their skill preparedness significantly improved upon the completion of the workshop in all 11 skills (P < .001 for all items). The improvement remained at the same level at 2 months in 7 skills. In 4 of the 11 skills, there was further improvement at the 2-month point. The frequency of self-directed skill practice also increased significantly in the 2-month survey for all 5 skills.

Conclusion: A virtual workshop of VitalTalk pedagogy improved self-reported preparedness of communication skills, and the impact was long-lasting in a non-U.S. setting as it likely induced self-practice of skills. Our findings encourage the use of a virtual format in any geographical location considering its enduring impact and easy accessibility.

Background: Family members of intensive care unit (ICU) patients often report poor communication, feeling unprepared for ICU family meetings, and poor psychological outcomes after decision-making. The objective of this study was to create a tool to prepare families for ICU family meetings and assess feasibility of using Communication Quality Analysis (CQA) to measure communication quality of family meetings. Methods: This observational study was conducted at an academic tertiary care center in Hershey, PA from March 2019 to 2020. Phase 1a involved conceptual design. Phase 1b entailed acceptability testing of 2 versions of the tool (text-only, comic) with 9 family members of non-capacitated ICU patients; thematic analysis of semi-strucutred interviews was conducted. Phase 1c assessed feasibility of applying CQA to audio-recorded ICU family meetings (n = 17); 3 analysts used CQA to assess 6 domains of communication quality. Wilcoxon Signed Rank tests were used to interpret CQA scores. Results: Four themes emerged from Phase 1b interviews: participants 1) found the tool useful for meeting preparation and organizing thoughts, 2) appreciated emotional content, 3) preferred the comic form (67%), and 4) had indifferent or negative perceptions about specific elements. In Phase 1c, clinicians scored higher on the CQA content and engagement domains; family members scored higher on the emotion domain. CQA scores in the relationship and face domains had the lowest quality ratings. Conclusions: Let's Talk may help families become better prepared for ICU family meetings. CQA provides a feasible approach to assessing communication quality that identifies specific areas of strengths and weaknesses in communication.