Search

Background Access to specialty palliative care delivery in the intensive care unit is inconsistent across institutions. The intensive care unit at the study institution uses a screening tool to identify patients likely to benefit from specialty palliative care, yet little is known about outcomes associated with the use of screening tools. Objective To identify outcomes associated with specialty palliative care referral among patients with critical illness. Methods Records of 112 patients with positive results on palliative care screening were retrospectively reviewed to compare outcomes between patients who received a specialty palliative care consult and those who did not. Primary outcome measures were length of stay, discharge disposition, and escalation of care. Results Sixty-five patients (58%) did not receive a palliative care consult. No significant differences were found in length of hospital or intensive care unit stay. Most patients who experienced mechanical ventilation did not receive a palliative care consultation (χ2 = 5.14, P = .02). Patients who were discharged to home were also less likely to receive a consult (χ2 = 4.1, P = .04), whereas patients who were discharged to hospice were more likely to receive a consult (χ2 = 19.39, P < .001). Conclusions Unmet needs exist for specialty palliative care. Understanding the methods of identifying patients for specialty palliative care and providing them with such care is critically important. Future research is needed to elucidate the factors providers use in their decisions to order or defer specialty palliative care consultation.

Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-25T10:17:08Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2021-02-01 Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP) Objective: To assess whether medical orders within Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) forms reflect patients' preferences for care at the end of life. Design: This cross-sectional study assessed the agreement between medical orders in POLST forms and the free-form text documentation of an advance care planning conversation performed by an independent researcher during a single episode of hospitalization. Setting and Participants: Inpatients at a single public university hospital, aged 21 years or older, and for whom one of their attending physicians provided a negative answer to the following question: “Would I be surprised if this patient died in the next year?” Data collection occurred between October 2016 and September 2017. Measures: Agreement between medical orders in POLST forms and the free-form text documentation of an advance care planning conversation was measured by kappa statistics. Results: Sixty-two patients were interviewed. Patients' median (interquartile range) age was 62 (56-70) years, and 21 patients (34%) were women. Overall, in 7 (11%) cases, disagreement in at least 1 medical order for life-sustaining treatment was found between POLST forms and the content of the independent advance care planning conversation. The kappa statistic for cardiopulmonary resuscitation was 0.92 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.82-1.00]; for level of medical intervention, 0.90 (95% CI: 0.81-0.99); and for artificially administered nutrition, 0.87 (95% CI: 0.75-0.98). Conclusions and Implications: The high level of agreement between medical orders in POLST forms and the documentation in an independent advance care planning conversation offers further support for the POLST paradigm. In addition, the finding that the agreement was not 100% underscores the need to confirm frequently that POLST medical orders accurately reflect patients' current values and preferences of care. Botucatu Medical School Sao Paulo State University (UNESP) Center for Nursing Excellence St Luke's Health System California State University Institute for Palliative Care Center for Health Ethics and Law West Virginia University Botucatu Medical School Sao Paulo State University (UNESP) FAPESP: 2014/23966-0 FAPESP: 2014/23997-3 FAPESP: 2016/25410-5

Made available in DSpace on 2018-12-11T17:20:51Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2018-06-01 Background: The Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) paradigm is considered one of the most important strategies to respect patients' values at the end of life in the United States. The cross-cultural adaptation of POLST entailed several methodological considerations, which may be informative for international researchers who may also consider bringing POLST to their countries as a means to promote care at the end of life that is consistent with patients' preferences. Objective: To report the methods and outcome of the cross-cultural adaptation of the POLST form to Brazil. Design: Cross-cultural adaptation study. Setting/Subjects: Twenty physicians and 10 patients at a university hospital participated in the pilot tests. Results: The cross-cultural adaptation process included choosing which existing POLST form(s) to use as a source, deciding the intended reading level, which healthcare professionals should be allowed to sign the form, and consultation with attorneys, bioethicists, and members of the National POLST Paradigm Task Force. Pilot tests occurred in two stages using different approaches. First, 20 physicians were trained about POLST and asked for any unclear aspects related to the form. Second, trained investigators completed POLST forms after engaging in advance care planning conversations with 10 hospitalized patients or patients' surrogates. Conclusions: This report provides a basis for future cross-cultural adaptations of POLST to other countries. The authors hope such new adaptations will broaden the possibilities of research using POLST and also may promote wider provision of care at the end of life that is consistent with patients' preferences. Internal Medicine Department Sao Paolo State University (UNESP) Departamento de Clínica Médica Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu-UNESP, Av. Prof. Mario Rubens Guimaraes Montenegro S/N Anesthesiology Department Botucatu Medical School Sao Paolo State University (UNESP) Campinas Federation of Social Organizations - FEAC Center for Nursing Excellence St. Luke's Health System Center for Health Ethics and Law West Virginia University Institute for Palliative Care California State University Internal Medicine Department Sao Paolo State University (UNESP) Departamento de Clínica Médica Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu-UNESP, Av. Prof. Mario Rubens Guimaraes Montenegro S/N Anesthesiology Department Botucatu Medical School Sao Paolo State University (UNESP)

Importance Despite its spread in much of the United States and increased international interest, the Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) paradigm still lacks supporting evidence. The interrater reliability of the POLST form to translate patients’ values and preferences into medical orders for care at the end of life remains to be studied. Objective To assess the interrater reliability of the medical orders documented in POLST forms. Design, Setting, and Participants This cross-sectional study was conducted in a public university hospital in southeastern Brazil. Two independent researchers interviewed the same patients or decision-making surrogates (n = 64) during a single episode of hospitalization within a time frame of 1 to 7 days. Eligible participants were hospitalized adults aged 21 years or older who were expected to remain hospitalized for at least 4 days and whose attending physician responded no to the question, Would I be surprised if this patient died in the next year? Data collection occurred between November 1, 2015, and September 20, 2016, and first data analyses were performed on October 3, 2016. Main Outcomes and Measures Interrater reliability as measured by κ statistics. Results Of the 64 participants interviewed in the study, 53 (83%) were patients and 11 (17%) were surrogates. Patients’ mean (SD) age was 64 (14) years, and 35 patients (55%) and 8 surrogates (73%) were women. Overall, in 5 cases (8%), disagreement in at least 1 medical order for life-sustaining treatment was found in the POLST form, changing from the first interview to the second interview. The κ statistic for cardiopulmonary resuscitation was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.80-1.00); for level of medical intervention, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.76-1.00); and for artificially administered nutrition, 0.92 (95% CI, 0.83-1.00). Conclusions and Relevance The high interrater reliability of the medical orders in POLST forms appears to offer further support for this advance care planning paradigm; in addition, the finding that this interrater reliability was not 100% underscores the need to ensure that patients or their surrogates have decision-making capacity and to confirm that the content of POLST forms accurately reflects patients’ current treatment preferences.

Article-at-a-Glance Background Sedation management, delirium monitoring, and mobility programs have been addressed in evidence-based critical care guidelines and care bundles, yet implementation in the ICU remains variable. As critically ill patients occupy higher percentages of hospital beds in the United States and beyond, it is increasingly important to determine mechanisms to deliver better care. The Institute for Healthcare Improvement's Rethinking Critical Care (IHI-RCC) program was established to reduce harm of critically ill patients by decreasing sedation, increasing monitoring and management of delirium, and increasing patient mobility. Case studies of a convenience sample of five participating hospitals/health systems chosen in advance of the determination of their clinical outcomes are presented in terms of how they got started and process improvements in sedation management, delirium management, and mobility. Methods The IHI-RCC program involved one live case study and five iterations of an in-person seminar in a 33-month period (March 2011–November 2013) that emphasized interdisciplinary teamwork and culture change. Results Qualitative descriptions of the changes tested at each of the five case study sites demonstrate improvements in teamwork, processes, and reliability of daily work. Improvement in ICU length of stay and length of stay on the ventilator between the pre- and postimplementation periods varied from slight to substantial. Conclusion Changing critical care practices requires an interdisciplinary approach addressing cultural, psychological, and practical issues. The key lessons of the IHI-RCC program are as follows: the importance of testing changes on a small scale, feeding back data regularly and providing sufficient education, and building will through seeing the work in action.

Rapid response teams (RRTs) can effectively foster discussions about appropriate goals of care and address other emergent palliative care needs of patients and families facing life-threatening illness on hospital wards. In this article, The Improving Palliative Care in the ICU (IPAL-ICU) Project brings together interdisciplinary expertise and existing data to address the following: special challenges for providing palliative care in the rapid response setting, knowledge and skills needed by RRTs for delivery of high-quality palliative care, and strategies for improving the integration of palliative care with rapid response critical care. We discuss key components of communication with patients, families, and primary clinicians to develop a goal-directed treatment approach during a rapid response event. We also highlight the need for RRT expertise to initiate symptom relief. Strategies including specific clinician training and system initiatives are then recommended for RRT care improvement. We conclude by suggesting that as evaluation of their impact on other outcomes continues, performance by RRTs in meeting palliative care needs of patients and families should also be measured and improved.

Pain, dyspnea, and thirst are three of the most prevalent, intense, and distressing symptoms of intensive care unit (ICU) patients. In this report, the interdisciplinary Advisory Board of the Improving Palliative Care in the ICU (IPAL-ICU) Project brings together expertise in both critical care and palliative care along with current information to address challenges in assessment and management. We conducted a comprehensive review of literature focusing on intensive care and palliative care research related to palliation of pain, dyspnea, and thirst. Evidence-based methods to assess pain are the enlarged 0–10 Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for ICU patients able to self-report and the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool or Behavior Pain Scale for patients who cannot report symptoms verbally or non-verbally. The Respiratory Distress Observation Scale is the only known behavioral scale for assessment of dyspnea, and thirst is evaluated by patient self-report using an 0–10 NRS. Opioids remain the mainstay for pain management, and all available intravenous opioids, when titrated to similar pain intensity end points, are equally effective. Dyspnea is treated (with or without invasive or noninvasive mechanical ventilation) by optimizing the underlying etiological condition, patient positioning and, sometimes, supplemental oxygen. Several oral interventions are recommended to alleviate thirst. Systematized improvement efforts addressing symptom management and assessment can be implemented in ICUs. Relief of symptom distress is a key component of critical care for all ICU patients, regardless of condition or prognosis. Evidence-based approaches for assessment and treatment together with well-designed work systems can help ensure comfort and related favorable outcomes for the critically ill.

Although successful models for palliative care delivery and quality improvement in the intensive care unit have been described, their applicability in surgical intensive care unit settings has not been fully addressed. We undertook to define specific challenges, strategies, and solutions for integration of palliative care in the surgical intensive care unit.We searched the MEDLINE database from inception to May 2011 for all English language articles using the term "surgical palliative care" or the terms "surgical critical care," "surgical ICU," "surgeon," "trauma" or "transplant," and "palliative care" or "end-of- life care" and hand-searched our personal files for additional articles. Based on review of these articles and the experiences of our interdisciplinary expert Advisory Board, we prepared this report.We critically reviewed the existing literature on delivery of palliative care in the surgical intensive care unit setting focusing on challenges, strategies, models, and interventions to promote effective integration of palliative care for patients receiving surgical critical care and their families.Characteristics of patients with surgical disease and practices, attitudes, and interactions of different disciplines on the surgical critical care team present distinctive issues for intensive care unit palliative care integration and improvement. Physicians, nurses, and other team members in surgery, critical care and palliative care (if available) should be engaged collaboratively to identify challenges and develop strategies. "Consultative," "integrative," and combined models can be used to improve intensive care unit palliative care, although optimal use of trigger criteria for palliative care consultation has not yet been demonstrated. Important components of an improvement effort include attention to efficient work systems and practical tools and to attitudinal factors and "culture" in the unit and institution. Approaches that emphasize delivery of palliative care together with surgical critical care hold promise to better integrate palliative care into the surgical intensive care unit.

This review highlights benefits that patients, families and clinicians can expect to realize when palliative care is intentionally incorporated into the PICU.We searched the MEDLINE database from inception to January 2014 for English-language articles using the terms "palliative care" or "end of life care" or "supportive care" and "pediatric intensive care." We also hand-searched reference lists and author files and relevant tools on the Center to Advance Palliative Care website.Two authors (physicians with experience in pediatric intensive care and palliative care) made final selections.We critically reviewed the existing data and tools to identify strategies for incorporating palliative care into the PICU.The Improving Palliative Care in the ICU Advisory Board used data and experience to address key questions relating to: pain and symptom management, enhancing quality of life, communication and decision-making, length of stay, sites of care, and grief and bereavement.Palliative care should begin at the time of a potentially life-limiting diagnosis and continue throughout the disease trajectory, regardless of the expected outcome. Although the PICU is often used for short term postoperative stabilization, PICU clinicians also care for many chronically ill children with complex underlying conditions and others receiving intensive care for prolonged periods. Integrating palliative care delivery into the PICU is rapidly becoming the standard for high quality care of critically ill children. Interdisciplinary ICU staff can take advantage of the growing resources for continuing education in pediatric palliative care principles and interventions.

To review the use of screening criteria (also known as "triggers") as a mechanism for engaging palliative care consultants to assist with care of critically ill patients and their families in the ICU.We searched the MEDLINE database from inception to December 2012 for all English-language articles using the terms "trigger," "screen," "referral," "tool," "triage," "case-finding," "assessment," "checklist," "proactive," or "consultation," together with "intensive care" or "critical care" and "palliative care," "supportive care," "end-of-life care," or "ethics." We also hand-searched reference lists and author files and relevant tools on the Center to Advance Palliative Care website.Two members (a physician and a nurse with expertise in clinical research, intensive care, and palliative care) of the interdisciplinary Improving Palliative Care in the ICU Project Advisory Board presented studies and tools to the full Board, which made final selections by consensus.We critically reviewed the existing data and tools to identify screening criteria for palliative care consultation, to describe methods for selecting, implementing, and evaluating such criteria, and to consider alternative strategies for increasing access of ICU patients and families to high-quality palliative care.The Improving Palliative Care in the ICU Advisory Board used data and experience to address key questions relating to: existing screening criteria; optimal methods for selection, implementation, and evaluation of such criteria; and appropriateness of the screening approach for a particular ICU.Use of specific criteria to prompt proactive referral for palliative care consultation seems to help reduce utilization of ICU resources without changing mortality, while increasing involvement of palliative care specialists for critically ill patients and families in need. Existing data and resources can be used in developing such criteria, which should be tailored for a specific ICU, implemented through an organized process involving key stakeholders, and evaluated by appropriate measures. In some settings, other strategies for increasing access to palliative care may be more appropriate.

Patients with advanced illness often spend time in an ICU, while nearly one-third of patients with advanced cancer who receive Medicare die in hospitals, often with failed ICU care. For most, death occurs following the withdrawal or withholding of life-sustaining treatments. The integration of palliative care is essential for high-quality critical care. Although palliative care specialists are becoming increasingly available, intensivists and other physicians are also expected to provide basic palliative care, including symptom treatment and communication about goals of care. Patients who are critically ill are often unable to make decisions about their care. In these situations, physicians must meet with family members or other surrogates to determine appropriate medical treatments. These meetings require clinical expertise to ensure that patient values are explored for medical decision making about therapeutic options, including palliative care. Meetings with families take time. Issues related to the disease process, prognosis, and treatment plan are complex, and decisions about the use or limitation of intensive care therapies have life-or-death implications. Inadequate reimbursement for physician services may be a barrier to the optimal delivery of high-quality palliative care, including effective communication. Appropriate documentation of time spent integrating palliative and critical care for patients who are critically ill can be consistent with the Current Procedural Terminology codes (99291 and 99292) for critical care services. The purpose of this article is to help intensivists and other providers understand the circumstances in which integration of palliative and critical care meets the definition of critical care services for billing purposes.

Significance: ICU delirium is recognized as a significant contributor to adverse ICU and hospital outcomes. Research in this area has grown over the last 5 years. It has shown the considerable impact of delirium on patient outcomes resulting in the creation of objective ICU delirium assessment tools like the CAM-ICU. Delirium has been correlated as a strong, independent predictor of prolonged length of stay, reintubation, higher mortality, and cost of care.