Search

Background: In 2007, a first survey on undergraduate palliative care teaching in Switzerland has revealed major heterogeneity of palliative care content, allocation of hours and distribution throughout the 6 year curriculum in Swiss medical faculties. This second survey in 2012/13 has been initiated as part of the current Swiss national strategy in palliative care (2010 - 2015) to serve as a longitudinal monitoring instrument and as a basis for redefinition of palliative care learning objectives and curriculum planning in our country. Methods: As in 2007, a questionnaire was sent to the deans of all five medical faculties in Switzerland in 2012. It consisted of eight sections: basic background information, current content and hours in dedicated palliative care blocks, current palliative care content in other courses, topics related to palliative care presented in other courses, recent attempts at improving palliative care content, palliative care content in examinations, challenges, and overall summary. Content analysis was performed and the results matched with recommendations from the EAPC for undergraduate training in palliative medicine as well as with recommendations from overseas countries. Results: There is a considerable increase in palliative care content, academic teaching staff and hours in all medical faculties compared to 2007. No Swiss medical faculty reaches the range of 40 h dedicated specifically to palliative care as recommended by the EAPC. Topics, teaching methods, distribution throughout different years and compulsory attendance still differ widely. Based on these results, the official Swiss Catalogue of Learning Objectives (SCLO) was complemented with 12 new learning objectives for palliative and end of life care (2013), and a national basic script for palliative care was published (2015). Conclusion: Performing periodic surveys of palliative care teaching at national medical faculties has proven to be a useful tool to adapt the national teaching framework and to improve the recognition of palliative medicine as an integral part of medical training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Few hospitals and heart failure (HF) clinics offer concurrent palliative care (PC) together with life-prolonging therapies. To know the prevalence of patients in HF clinics needing PC and useful tools to recognize them are the first steps to extending PC in those settings. However, it is still unknown whether tools commonly used to identify patients with HF needing PC can correctly distinguish them. Two systematic reviews found that the NECesidades PALiativas (NECPAL) tool was one of the two most commonly used tools to asses PC needs in HF patients. Therefore, we assessed 1) the prevalence of PC needs in HF clinics according to the NECPAL tool, and 2) the characteristics of the patients identified as having PC; mainly, their quality of life (QoL), symptom burden, and psychosocial problems., Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted at two HF clinics in Colombia. We assessed the prevalence of PC in the overall sample and in subgroups according to clinical and demographic variables. We assessed QoL, symptom burden, and psychosocial problems using the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12), the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) and the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS). We compared the results of these tools between patients identified as having PC needs (+NECPAL) and patients identified as not having PC needs (-NECPAL)., Results: Among the 178 patients, 78 (44%) had PC needs. The prevalence of PC needs was twice as nigh in patients NYHA III/IV as in patients NYHA I/II and almost twice as high in patients older than 70 years as in patients younger than 70 years. Compared to -NECPAL patients, +NECPAL patients had worse QoL, more severe shortness of breath, tiredness, drowsiness, and pain, and more psychosocial problems., Conclusion: The prevalence of PC needs in outpatient HF clinics is high and is even higher in older patients and in patients at more advanced NYHA stages. Compared to patients identified as not having PC needs, patients identified as having PC needs have worse QoL, more severe symptoms, and greater psychosocial problems. Including a PC provider in the multidisciplinary team of HF clinics may help to assess and cover these needs., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: The Needs Assessment Tool: Progressive Disease-Heart Failure (NAT: PD-HF) is a tool created to assess the needs of people living with heart failure and their informal caregivers to assist delivering care in a more comprehensive way that addresses actual needs that are unmet, and to improve quality of life. In this study, we aimed to (1) Translate the tool into German and culturally adapt it. (2) Assess internal consistency, inter-rater reliability, and test-retest reliability of the German NAT: PD-HF. (3) Evaluate whether and how patients and health care personnel understand the tool and its utility. (4) Assess the tool's face validity, applicability, relevance, and acceptability among health care personnel., Methods: Single-center validation study. The tool was translated from English into German using a forward-backward translation. To assess internal consistency, we used Cronbach´s alpha. To assess inter-rater reliability and test-retest reliability, we used Cohen´s kappa, and to assess validity we used face validity., Results: The translated tool showed good internal consistency. Raters were in substantial agreement on a majority of the questions, and agreement was almost perfect for all the questions in the test-retest analysis. Face validity was rated high by health care personnel., Conclusion: The German NAT: PD-HF is a reliable, valid, and internally consistent tool that is well accepted by both patients and health care personnel. However, it is important to keep in mind that effective use of the tool requires training of health care personnel., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: In contrast to typical measures employed to assess outcomes in healthcare such as mortality or recovery rates, it is difficult to define which specific outcomes of care are the most important in caring for dying individuals. Despite a variety of tools employed to assess different dimensions of palliative care, there is no consensus on a set of core outcomes to be measured in the last days of life. In order to optimise decision making in clinical practice and comparability of interventional studies, we aim to identify and propose a set of core outcomes for the care of the dying person., Methods: Following the COMET initiative approach, the proposed study will proceed through four stages to develop a set of core outcomes: In stage 1, a systematic review of the literature will identify outcomes measured in existing peer reviewed literature, as well as outcomes derived through qualitative studies. Grey literature, will also be included. Stage 2 will allow for the identification and determination of patient and proxy defined outcomes of care at the end of life via quantitative and qualitative methods at an international level. In stage 3, from a list of salient outcomes identified through stages 1 and 2, international experts, family members, patients, and patient advocates will be asked to score the importance of the preselected outcomes through a Delphi process. Stage 4 consists of a face-to-face consensus meeting of international experts and patient/family representatives in order to define, endorse, and propose the final Core Outcomes Set., Discussion: Core Outcome Sets aim at promoting uniform assessment of care outcomes in clinical practice as well as research. If consistently employed, a robust set of core outcomes for the end of life, and specifically for the dying phase, defined by relevant stakeholders, can ultimately be translated into best care for the dying person. Patient care will be improved by allowing clinicians to choose effective and meaningful treatments, and research impact will be improved by employing internationally agreed clinically relevant endpoints and enabling accurate comparison between studies in systematic reviews and/or in meta-analyses.

Following publication of the original article [1], an error in reference 18 was reported.

Background: The Surprise Question (SQ) "would I be surprised if this patient were to die in the next 12 months?" has been suggested to help clinicians, and especially General Practitioners (GPs), identify people who might benefit from palliative care. The prognostic accuracy of this approach is unclear and little is known about how GPs use this tool in practice. Are GPs consistent, individually and as a group? Are there international differences in the use of the tool? Does including the alternative Surprise Question ("Would I be surprised if the patient were still alive after 12 months?") alter the response? What is the impact on the treatment plan in response to the SQ? This study aims to address these questions., Methods: An online study will be completed by 600 (100 per country) registered GPs. They will be asked to review 20 hypothetical patient vignettes. For each vignette they will be asked to provide a response to the following four questions: (1) the SQ [Yes/No]; (2) the alternative SQ [Yes/No]; (3) the percentage probability of dying [0% no chance - 100% certain death]; and (4) the proposed treatment plan [multiple choice]. A "surprise threshold" for each participant will be calculated by comparing the responses to the SQ with the probability estimates of death. We will use linear regression to explore any differences in thresholds between countries and other clinician-related factors, such as years of experience. We will describe the actions taken by the clinicians and explore the differences between groups. We will also investigate the relationship between the alternative SQ and the other responses. Participants will receive a certificate of completion and the option to receive feedback on their performance., Discussion: This study explores the extent to which the SQ is consistently used at an individual, group, and national level. The findings of this study will help to understand the clinical value of using the SQ in routine practice., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03697213 (05/10/2018). Prospectively registered.

Background: This study was performed to evaluate the outcome after hemostatic radiotherapy (RT) of significant bleeding in incurable cancer patients., Methods: Patients treated by hemostatic RT between November 2006 and February 2010 were retrospectively analyzed. Bleeding was assessed according to the World Health Organization (WHO) scale (grade 0 = no bleeding, 1 = petechial bleeding, 2 = clinically significant bleeding, 3 = bleeding requiring transfusion, 4 = bleeding associated with fatality). The primary endpoint was bleeding at the end of RT. Key secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and acute toxicity. The bleeding score before and after RT were compared using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Time to event endpoints were estimated using the Kaplan Meier method., Results: Overall 62 patients were analyzed including 1 patient whose benign cause of bleeding was pseudomyxoma peritonei. Median age was 66 (range, 37-93) years. Before RT, bleeding was graded as 2 and 3 in 24 (39%) and 38 (61%) patients, respectively. A median dose of 20 (range, 5-45) Gy of hemostatic RT was applied to the bleeding site. At the end of RT, there was a statistically significant difference in bleeding (p < 0.001); it was graded as 0 ( n = 39), 1 ( n = 12), 2 ( n = 6), 3 ( n = 4) and 4 (n = 1). With a median follow-up of 19.3 (range, 0.3-19.3) months, the 6-month OS rate was 43%. Forty patients died (65%); 5 due to bleeding. No grade 3 or above acute toxicity was observed., Conclusions: Hemostatic RT seems to be a safe and effective treatment for clinically and statistically significantly reducing bleeding in incurable cancer patients.