Search

The integrated care pathways for the last days of life propose quality standards optimizing the care of patients and families. The Pallium Multidisciplinary Assistance Program (PAMPA ©) was implemented based on standards of the International Collaborative for Best Care for the Dying Person in 4 phases: induction, implementation, dissemination and sustainability, in five health centres in Argentina, between 2008 and 2018. A total of 1237 adult patients in the last days of life were included and cared for by palliative care teams trained in PAMPA©. An audit was conducted before and after the implementation of the Program, which is still going on. The median range of follow up into five centres from the beginning of the pathway until death varied from 16 to 178 hours. Care goals were compared: symptom control, communication, multidimensional needs, hydration and nutrition, documentation of interventions and post-mortem care. The overall analysis showed an improvement in the number of records (p = 0.001). The goal of communication on care plan to the patient showed no difference (p = 0.173). Continuous training, support and permanent teams supervision were carried out and perceptions and impact of the implementation were registered. The main emerging items of the qualitative analysis were: attitudes towards the program, fundamental contributions, strengths, weaknesses and subjective definition of the program, recognition of institutional cultural singularities and its influence on care. PAMPA© demonstrated its feasibility as a model of end of life care for patients and families, based on international quality standards

The early identification of patients with palliative needs has shown benefits in terms of quality of life and treatment goals. No prospective methods have been applied in Argentina to identify palliative needs in cancer patients. The NECPAL tool combines the physician’s own insight with objective indicators of disease progression and indicators of chronic advanced conditions. The aim of this study was to identify prognostic factors of mortality in hospitalized and ambulatory patients with cancer and palliative needs according to the NECPAL tool in a University Hospital in Buenos Aires city. Study variables were obtained by interviews with 10 physicians in charge of 317 patients with cancer over a 2-year follow-up period. A total of 183 patients with palliative needs were labelled as NECPAL+. Of these, 137 died after a median 4-month follow-up period. The death rate was 11% patients/month. The mortality was higher in inpatients during the first month (p < 0.003). In the multivariate model, the best predictors of mortality combining relevant indicators were: inpatients (HR 1.87; 95% CI 1.24-2.84; p = 0.003), initial diagnosis other than breast cancer (HR 2.04; 95% CI 1.23-3.40; p = 0.006), metastatic disease (HR 1.67; 95% CI 1.15-2.42; p = 0.007), functional deterioration (HR 1.95; 95% CI 1.28-2.97; p = 0.002), and malnutrition (HR 1.53; 95% CI 1.04-2.23; p = 0.02 9). The major breakthrough was the systematic prospective identification of palliative needs in cancer patients for the first time in Argentina. The NECPAL tool can improve the prediction of mortality in hospital settings. La identificación temprana de pacientes con necesidades paliativas ha demostrado beneficios en términos de calidad de vida y objetivos de tratamiento. En Argentina no han sido aplicados métodos prospectivos para identificar necesidades paliativas en pacientes con cáncer. El NECPAL CCOMS-ICO © combina la percepción del médico con indicadores objetivos de progresión de enfermedades crónicas avanzadas y es útil para determinar la prevalencia de pacientes con necesidades paliativas en la población general. El objetivo fue identificar factores pronósticos de mortalidad en pacientes internados y ambulatorios con cáncer y necesidades paliativas según NECPAL en un Hospital Universitario de la ciudad de Buenos Aires. Las variables se obtuvieron mediante entrevistas a 10 médicos a cargo de 317 pacientes con cáncer y necesidades paliativas durante dos años de seguimiento. Los predictores de mortalidad en el modelo multivariado fueron: hospitalización (HR 1.87; IC 95% 1.24-2.84; p = 0.003), diagnóstico distinto de cáncer de mama (HR 2.04; IC 95% 1.23-3.40; p = 0.006), enfermedad metastá sica (HR 1.67; IC 95% 1.15-2.42; p = 0.007), deterioro funcional (HR 1.95; IC 95% 1.28-2.97; p = 0.002) y nutricional (HR 1.53; IC 95% 1.04-2.23; p = 0.029). De los 183 pacientes con necesidades paliativas identificados como NECPAL+, 137 murieron en un período medio de 4 meses. La tasa de mortalidad fue 11% por mes. La mortalidad fue mayor (p < 0.003) en el primer mes de hospitalización. El mayor logro fue la identificación sistemática y prospectiva, por primera vez en Argentina, de necesidades paliativas en pacientes con cáncer. La herramienta NECPAL puede mejorar la predicción de la mortalidad en entornos hospitalarios.

There have been several recent publications related to therapeutic obstinacy and futility in the Intensive Care Unit. However, little has been published about "the family obstinacy" in persisting with invasive measures in seriously ill patients, despite the appropriate information provided to them about the patient's poor short-term prognosis. On certain occasions, these critical patients are unable to make decisions on the proposed treatments and, unfortunately, many of them have not previously indicated their preferences in terms of limits to invasive measures (advanced directives). Thus, the patient's relatives are the ones who finally assume this arduous task and, in several occasions, they make decisions that do not correspond with the patient's actual wishes. Palliative medicine is of invaluable help in the difficult goal of improving communication among doctors, patients and patients relatives. Limits to intervention can be difficult and vague, generating multiple problems in the decision-making process. On certain occasions and despite adequate information provided by therapists and palliative care doctors, patients' relatives do not accept professional directives indicating to stop invasive interventions. Understanding futility justification may be relevant to the appropriate resolution of these disputes. In this article, we intend to discuss the subject "futility in Intensive Care Unit" and how to face the seldom addressed "family obstinacy" issue in potentially unrecoverable situations, despite adequate medical information

In healthcare, an ethical concern that arises during the decision making process is considered to be a bioethical dilemma. It is often the case that in the absence of proper deliberation, the problem is transferred to a bioethics committee, not even representing precisely a dilemma. Bioethics emerged as a discipline in the mid-20th century. It is defined as a support to decision-making in ethical dilemmas centered on two aspects: ethics of clinical investigation, focused on protecting the rights of research subjects, and bioethics in medical practice, of an advisory nature. To recognize the difference among difficult or complex clinical circumstances and ethical dilemmas could allow knowing when it is necessary to request for advice of a committee. It is not so much a question of deciding what is right or wrong, but which is the most advisable solution to a problem. We review the history of Bioethics Committees in Argentina that are facing today the challenge of promoting social responsibility and opening deliberations to community and health professionals. In the 20th century two historical moments are recognized: a pioneering and slow first period, and a second one of legal regulatory framework. Considering deliberation as a method of ethics, this article proposes a case analysis procedure and the deliberative method to elucidate dilemmas, with or without the help of a Committee.