Search

Objective: To help healthcare professionals (HCP) act with more confidence when communicating about approaching death, we sought to develop a communication model for HCP to facilitate conversations with dying patients and family caregivers (FC) in nonemergency situations., Methods: We used a four-phase integrative approach: (1) creation of a preliminary model based on a systematic literature review and expert knowledge, (2) review of the model draft by international palliative care experts, (3) review by key stakeholders, and (4) final appraisal by communication experts., Results: After the clinical recognition of dying, the communication model provides a structure and practical communication aids for navigating the conversation based on three phases. It describes the content and relational level as core dimensions of effective conversations about approaching death and highlights the importance of HCP self-awareness and self-care when caring for the dying., Conclusion: Based on systematic involvement of key stakeholders, the model supports clinicians navigating challenging conversations about approaching death with dying patients and their FC successfully and with more confidence., Innovation: This study expands the theoretical basis for communication about approaching death and offers a pragmatic model for educational interventions and clinical use., Competing Interests: Sissel Guttormsen reports financial support was provided by Swiss Cancer Research Foundation (KFS-4522-08-2018). If there are other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (© 2024 The Author(s).)

Background: Early integration of palliative care into oncology care has shown positive effects on patient symptoms and quality of life. It may also reduce health care costs. However given the heterogeneity of settings and interventions and the lack of information on the minimally effective dose for influencing care utilisation and costs, it remains uncertain whether early palliative care reduces costs., Objectives: We sought to determine whether an early palliative care intervention integrated in usual oncology care in a Swiss hospital setting reduced utilisation and costs of health care in the last month of life when compared with usual oncology care alone., Methods: We performed a cost-consequences analysis alongside a multicentre trial. We extracted costs from administrative health insurance data and health care utilisation from family caregiver surveys to compare two study arms: usual oncology care and usual oncology care plus the palliative care intervention. The intervention consisted of a single-structured, multiprofessional conversation with the patient about symptoms, end-of-life decisions, network building and support for carers (SENS). The early palliative care intervention was performed within 16 weeks of the diagnosis of a tumour stage not amenable or responsive to curative treatment., Results: We included 58 participants with advanced cancer in our economic evaluation study. Median overall health care costs in the last month of life were 7892 Swiss Francs (CHF) (interquartile range: CHF 5637-13,489) in the intervention arm and CHF 8492 [CHF 5411-12,012] in the control arm. The average total intervention treatment cost CHF 380 per patient. Integrating an early palliative care intervention into usual oncology care showed no significant difference in health care utilisation or overall health care costs between intervention and control arms (p = 0.98)., Conclusion: Although early palliative care is often presented as a cost-reducing care service, we could not show a significant effect of the SENS intervention on health care utilisation and costs in the last month of life. However, it may be that the intervention was not intensive enough, the timeframe too short or the study population too small for measurable effects. Patients appreciated the intervention. Single-structured early palliative care interventions are easy to implement in clinical practice and present low treatment costs. Further research about the economic impact of early palliative care should focus on extracting large, detailed cost databases showing potential shifts in cost and cost-effectiveness., Clinical Trials: gov Identifier: NCT01983956.

Palliative sedation is defined as the monitored use of medications intended to induce a state of decreased or absent awareness (unconsciousness) to relieve the burden of otherwise intractable suffering in a manner ethically acceptable to the patient, their family, and healthcare providers. In Switzerland, the prevalence of continuous deep sedation until death increased from 4.7% in 2001 to 17.5% of all deceased in 2013, depending on the research method used and on regional variations. Yet, these numbers may be overestimated due to a lack of understanding of the term "continuous deep sedation" by for example respondents of the questionnaire-based study. Inadequately trained and inexperienced healthcare professionals may incorrectly or inappropriately perform palliative sedation due to uncertainties regarding its definitions and practice. Therefore, the expert members of the Bigorio group and the authors of this manuscript believe that national recommendations should be published and made available to healthcare professionals to provide practical, terminological, and ethical guidance. The Bigorio group is the working group of the Swiss Palliative Care Society whose task is to publish clinical recommendations at a national level in Switzerland. These recommendations aim to provide guidance on the most critical questions and issues related to palliative sedation. The Swiss Society of Palliative Care (palliative.ch) mandated a writing board comprising four clinical experts (three physicians and one ethicist) and two national academic experts to revise the 2005 Bigorio guidelines. A first draft was created based on a narrative literature review, which was internally reviewed by five academic institutions (Lausanne, Geneva, Bern, Zürich, and Basel) and the heads of all working groups of the Swiss Society of Palliative Care before finalising the guidelines. The following themes are discussed regarding palliative sedation: (a) definitions and clinical aspects, (b) the decision-making process, (c) communication with patients and families, (d) patient monitoring, (e) pharmacological approaches, and (f) ethical and controversial issues. Palliative sedation must be practised with clinical and ethical accuracy and competence to avoid harm and ethically questionable use. Specialist palliative care teams should be consulted before initiating palliative sedation to avoid overlooking other potential treatment options for the patient's symptoms and suffering.

Background: Communities and local governments invest in compassionate communities (CCs) a great deal of time, money, effort, and work. However, it is not known whether the CCs are having the effect they are expected to have, so the value of continuing with these initiatives is unknown, and there is a need for a model for evaluating CCs to solve the question., Objectives: To identify a set of core outcomes or benefits that should be measured to assess the impact of the CCs., Design: Multiple-methods study involving three communities, each in a different country (Argentina, Colombia, and Switzerland)., Methods and Analysis: To identifying the set of core outcomes, which is the first step in developing the CC evaluation model, five phases will follow: online meetings, literature review, fieldwork, Delphi survey, and social transfer. We will involve members of the local communities of Bern, Buenos Aires, and Medellin at three different levels: (1) citizens (e.g. patients, caregivers, and family members), (2) organizations and institutions involved in the program implementation (e.g. health care organizations, churches, non-governmental organizations, and schools), and (3) political and governmental sectors., Ethics: The study will be conducted following existing international regulations and guidance such as the Declaration of Helsinki. The ethics committee of Pallium Latin America and the ethics committee of the canton of Bern considered our application exempt from the need for approval. Ethics approval in Bern and Buenos Aires is in the process of being obtained. The ethics committee of the Pontifical Bolivarian University approved this protocol., Discussion: We expect that this project will help bridge the gap in knowledge regarding the measurable impact of the CCs and enhance more CC development., Competing Interests: The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s), 2023.)

Objective: To summarize the available literature on using machine learning (ML) for palliative care practice as well as research and to assess the adherence of the published studies to the most important ML best practices. Methods: The MEDLINE database was searched for the use of ML in palliative care practice or research, and the records were screened according to PRISMA guidelines. Results: In total, 22 publications using machine learning for mortality prediction (n = 15), data annotation (n = 5), predicting morbidity under palliative therapy (n = 1), and predicting response to palliative therapy (n = 1) were included. Publications used a variety of supervised or unsupervised models, but mostly tree-based classifiers and neural networks. Two publications had code uploaded to a public repository, and one publication uploaded the dataset. Conclusions: Machine learning in palliative care is mainly used to predict mortality. Similarly to other applications of ML, external test sets and prospective validations are the exception.

Background: There are increasing calls to establish heart failure (HF) clinics due to their effectiveness in the interdisciplinary management of people living with HF. However, although a recommendation exists for palliative care (PC) providers to be part of the interdisciplinary team, few of the established HF clinics include them in their teams. Therefore, in this qualitative study, we aimed to understand the unmet PC needs of patients with HF attending an already established HF clinic., Methods: Secondary qualitative analysis of structured interviews undertaken within a larger study to validate the German version of the Needs Assessment Tool: Progressive Disease-Heart Failure (NAT: PD-HF). The NAT: PD-HF is a tool that aims to assess unmet needs in patients with HF. The interviews took place between January and March 2020 with patients from the ambulatory HF Clinic of a University Hospital in Switzerland. For this analysis, we transcribed and thematically analyzed the longest and most content-rich interviews until we reached data saturation at 31 participants. The interviews lasted 31 min on average (24-48 min)., Results: Participants ( n = 31) had a median age of 64 years (IQR 56-77), the majority had reduced ejection fraction, were men, and were classified as having a New York Heart Association functional class II. Participants were in general satisfied with the treatment and information received at the HF clinic. However, they reported several unmet needs. We therefore identified three ambivalences as main themes: (I) "feeling well-informed but missing essential discussions", (II) "although feeling mostly satisfied with the care, remaining with unmet care needs", and (III) "fearing a referral to palliative care but acknowledging its importance"., Conclusion: Although patients who are receiving multidisciplinary management in ambulatory HF clinics are generally satisfied with the care received, they remain with unmet needs. These unmet needs, such as the need for advance care planning or the need for timely and tactful end-of-life discussions, can be fulfilled by PC providers. Including personnel trained in PC as part of the multidisciplinary team could help to address patients' needs, thus improving the quality of care and the quality of life of people living with HF., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Gonzalez-Jaramillo, Maessen, Luethi, Guyer, Hunziker, Eychmüller and Zambrano.)

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.

Context: Although the number of studies on the economic impact of palliative care (PC) is growing, the great majority report costs from North America., Objectives: We aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of PC hospital cost components from the perspective of a European mixed funded health care system by identifying cost drivers of PC and quantifying their effect on hospital costs compared to usual care (UC)., Methods: We performed a retrospective, observational analysis examining cost data from the last hospitalization of patients who died at a large academic hospital in Switzerland comparing patients receiving PC vs. UC., Results: Total hospital costs were similar in PC and UC with a mean difference of CHF -2777 [95% CI -12,713 to 8506, P = 0.60]. Average costs per day decreased by CHF -3224 [95% CI -3811 to -2631, P < 0.001] for PC patients with significant reduction of costs for diagnostic intervention and medication. Higher cost components for PC patients were catering, room, nursing, social counseling, and nonmedical therapists. In sensitivity analyses, when we restricted PC exposure to three days from admission, total costs and average costs per day were significantly lower for PC., Conclusion: Studies measuring the impact of PC on hospital costs should analyze various cost components beyond total costs to understand wanted and potentially unwanted cost-reducing effects. An international definition of a set of cost components, specific for cost-impact PC studies, may help avoid superficial and potentially dangerous cost discussions., (Copyright © 2019 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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.