Search

Background: In response to a growing need for accessible, efficient, and effective palliative care services, we designed, implemented, and evaluated a novel palliative care at home (PC@H) model for people with serious illness that is centered around a community health worker, a registered nurse, and a social worker, with an advanced practice nurse and a physician for support. Our objectives were to measure the impact of receipt of PC@H on patient symptoms, quality of life, and healthcare utilization and costs., Methods: We enrolled 136 patients with serious illness in this parallel, randomized controlled trial. Our primary outcome was change in symptom burden at 6 weeks. Secondary outcomes included change in symptom burden at 3 months, change in quality of life at 6 weeks and 3 months, estimated using a group t-test. In an exploratory aim, we examined the impact of PC@H on healthcare utilization and cost using a generalized linear model., Results: PC@H resulted in a greater improvement in patient symptoms at 6 weeks (1.30 score improvement, n = 37) and 3 months (3.14 score improvement, n = 21) compared with controls. There were no differences in healthcare utilization and costs between the two groups. Unfortunately, due to the COVID-19 pandemic and a loss of funding, the trial was not able to be completed as originally intended., Conclusions: A palliative care at home model that leverages community health workers, registered nurses, and social workers as the primary deliverers of care may result in improved patient symptoms and quality of life compared with standard care. We did not demonstrate significant differences in healthcare utilization and cost associated with receipt of PC@H, likely due to inability to reach the intended sample size and insufficient statistical power, due to elements beyond the investigators' control such as the COVID-19 public health emergency and changes in grant funding., (© 2024 Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. This article has been contributed to by U.S. Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.)

Objectives: Congruence between the preferred and actual place of death is recognised as an important quality indicator in end-of-life care. However, there may be complexities about preferences that are ignored in summary congruence measures. This article examined factors associated with preferred place of death, actual place of death, and congruence for a sample of patients who had received specialist palliative care in the last three months of life in Ireland. Methods: This article analysed merged data from two previously published mortality follow-back surveys: Economic Evaluation of Palliative Care in Ireland (EEPCI); Irish component of International Access, Rights and Empowerment (IARE I). Logistic regression models examined factors associated with (a) preferences for home death versus institutional setting, (b) home death versus hospital death, and (c) congruent versus non-congruent death. Setting: Four regions with differing levels of specialist palliative care development in Ireland. Participants: Mean age 77, 50% female/male, 19% living alone, 64% main diagnosis cancer. Data collected 2011-2015, regression model sample sizes: n = 342-351. Results: Congruence between preferred and actual place of death in the raw merged dataset was 51%. Patients living alone were significantly less likely to prefer home versus institution death (OR 0.389, 95%CI 0.157-0.961), less likely to die at home (OR 0.383, 95%CI 0.274-0.536), but had no significant association with congruence. Conclusions: The findings highlight the value in examining place of death preferences as well as congruence, because preferences may be influenced by what is feasible rather than what patients would like. The analyses also underline the importance of well-resourced community-based supports, including homecare, facilitating hospital discharge, and management of complex (eg, non-cancer) conditions, to facilitate patients to die in their preferred place.

Background: In order to improve early access to palliative care, strategies for monitoring referral practices in real-time are needed. Objective: To evaluate how Australia-Modified Karnofsky Performance Status (AKPS) at the time of initial palliative care consult differs between serious illnesses and could be used to identify opportunities for earlier referral. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated data from an inpatient palliative care consult registry. Serious illnesses were classified using ICD-10 codes. AKPS was assessed by palliative care clinicians during consult. Results: The AKPS distribution varied substantially between the different serious illnesses ( p  < 0.001). While patients with cancer and heart disease often had preserved functional status, the majority of patients with dementia, neurological, lung, liver, and renal disease were already completely bedbound at the time of initial palliative care consult. Conclusion: Measuring functional status at the time of palliative care referral could be helpful for monitoring referral practices and identifying opportunities for earlier referral.

Context: Although many patients with critical illness may benefit from involvement of palliative care specialists, adoption of these services in the intensive care unit (ICU) is variable., Objective: To characterize reasons for variable buy-in for specialty palliative care in the ICU, and identify factors associated with routine involvement of specialists in appropriate cases., Methods: Qualitative study using in-depth, semi-structured interviews with ICU attendings, nurses, and palliative care clinicians, purposively sampled from eight ICUs (medical, surgical, cardiothoracic, neurological) with variable use of palliative care services within two urban, academic medical centers. Interviews were transcribed and coded using an iterative and inductive approach with constant comparison., Results: We identified three types of specialty palliative care adoption in ICUs, representing different phases of buy-in. The "nascent" phase was characterized by the need for education about palliative care services and clarification of which patients may be appropriate for involvement. During the key "transitional" phase, use of specialists depended on development of "comfort and trust", which centered on four aspects of the ICU-palliative care clinician relationship: 1) increasing familiarity between clinicians; 2) navigating shared responsibility with primary clinicians; 3) having a collaborative approach to care; and 4) having successful experiences. In the "mature" phase, ICU and palliative care clinicians worked to strengthen their existing collaboration, but further adoption was limited by the availability and resources of the palliative care team., Conclusion: This conceptual framework identifying distinct phases of adoption may assist institutions aiming to foster sustained adoption of specialty palliative care in an ICU setting., (Copyright © 2021 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Meeting the needs of seriously ill SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) patients requires novel models of deploying health social workers (SWs) to expand the palliative care workforce. To inform such expansion, understanding the current state of health SWs' core palliative care skills is necessary. Methods: Following minimal training, health SWs in one New York City hospital were surveyed about their frequency, competence, and confidence in using core palliative care skills. Results: Of the 170 health SWs surveyed, 46 (27%) responded, of whom 21 (46%) and 24 (52%) had palliative care training before and during the COVID-19 surge, respectively. Health SWs reported a "moderate improvement" in the use of three skills: "identify a medical decision maker," "assess prognostic understanding," and "coordinate care." There was "minimal decrease" to "no improvement" to "minimal improvement" in competence and confidence of skill use. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that educational initiatives can improve health SWs' use of core palliative care skills.

The sudden and unprecedented increase in seriously ill patients with COVID-19, coupled with both the lack of core palliative care training and expertise among frontline providers and the specialty-trained palliative care workforce shortage, produced immediate challenges to meet the needs of this novel seriously ill patient population. In this article, we describe the rapid expansion and creation of new specialty palliative care services across a health system to meet demands of the COVID-19 surge in New York City. During April 2020, 1019 patients received inpatient specialty palliative care consultations across the Mount Sinai Health System. This overview demonstrates how palliative care services can be titrated up rapidly to meet the acute increase in hospitalized persons with serious illness due to COVID-19, and how these services tailored to the changing needs across a health system.

Background: In the United States, the percentage of hospitals over 50 beds with palliative care programs has risen substantially from 7% of hospitals in 2001 to 72% in 2017. Yet the dynamic nature of program adoption and closure over time is not known. Objective: To examine the rate of palliative care program adoption and closure and associated hospital and geographic characteristics in a national sample of U.S. hospitals. Design: Adoption and closure rates were calculated for 3696 U.S. hospitals between 2009 and 2017. We used multivariable logistic regression models to examine the association between adoption and closure status and hospital, geographic, and community characteristics. Setting/Subjects: All nonfederal general medical and surgical, cancer, heart, and obstetric or gynecological hospitals, of all sizes, in the United States in operation in both 2009 and 2017. Results: By 2017, 34.9% (812/2327) of the hospitals without palliative care in 2009 had adopted palliative care programs, and 15.0% (205/1369) of the hospitals with programs had closed them. In multivariable models, hospitals in metropolitan areas, nonprofit and public hospitals (compared to for-profit hospitals), and those with residency training approval by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education were significantly more likely to adopt and significantly less likely to close palliative care programs during the study period. Conclusions: This study indicates that palliative care is not equitably adopted nor sustained by hospitals in the United States. Federal and state interventions may be required to ensure that high-quality care is available to our nation's sickest patients.

Background: At the end of life, formal care costs are high. Informal care (IC) costs, and their effects on outcomes, are not known. This study aimed to determine the IC costs for older adults in the last 3 months of life, and their relationships with outcomes, adjusting for care quality., Methods: Mortality follow-back postal survey., Setting: Palliative care services in England (London), Ireland (Dublin) and the USA (New York, San Francisco)., Participants: Informal carers (ICrs) of decedents who had received palliative care., Data: ICrs reported hours and activities, care quality, positive aspects and burdens of caregiving, and completed the Texas Revised Inventory of Grief (TRIG)., Analysis: All costs (formal, informal) were calculated by multiplying reported hours of activities by country-specific costs for that activity. IC costs used country-specific shadow prices, e.g. average hourly wages and unit costs for nursing care. Multivariable logistic regression analysis explored the association of potential explanatory variables, including IC costs and care quality, on three outcomes: positive aspects and burdens of caregiving, and subsequent grief., Results: We received 767 completed surveys, 245 from London, 282 Dublin, 131 New York and 109 San Francisco. Most respondents were women (70%); average age was 60 years. On average, patients received 66-76 h per week from ICrs for 'being on call', 52-55 h for ICrs being with them, 19-21 h for personal care, 17-21 h for household tasks, 15-18 h for medical procedures and 7-10 h for appointments. Mean (SD) IC costs were as follows: USA $32,468 (28,578), England $36,170 (31,104) and Ireland $43,760 (36,930). IC costs accounted for 58% of total (formal plus informal) costs. Higher IC costs were associated with less grief and more positive perspectives of caregiving. Poor home care was associated with greater caregiver burden., Conclusions: Costs to informal carers are larger than those to formal care services for people in the last three months of life. If well supported ICrs can play a role in providing care, and this can be done without detriment to them, providing that they are helped. Improving community palliative care and informal carer support should be a focus for future investment.

Background: Over the past two decades, the number of hospitals with palliative care has increased significantly. Objective: This study analyzes the availability of palliative care in U.S. hospitals and examines the variation by hospital characteristics, community-level socioeconomic demographics, health care markets, and geographic characteristics. Methods: Data were obtained from the American Hospital Association Annual Survey Database for 2017 and supplemented with 2016 for nonresponders, the United States Census Bureau's 2017 American Community Survey, the Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care's 2016 Spending and 2011 Hospital and Physician Capacity datasets, the National Palliative Care Registry™, state-level directories on palliative care, and web-based searches. Multivariable logistic regression and average marginal effects were used to examine predictors of hospital palliative care programs. Results: Seventy-two percent of hospitals with 50 or more beds had palliative care programs. Hospital and geographic characteristics were significantly associated with the presence of palliative care. Most notably, nonprofit hospitals were 24.5 percentage points more likely than for-profit hospitals to have palliative care, and metropolitan areas were 15.4 percentage points more likely than rural areas, controlling for other variables. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that availability of palliative care in U.S. hospitals is determined by where patients live and the type of hospital to which they are admitted. Equitable and reliable availability to quality palliative care must improve across the nation.

Background: The Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY) is internationally recognized as standard metric of health outcomes in cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) in healthcare. The ongoing debate concerning the appropriateness of its use for decision-making in palliative care has been recently mapped in a review. The aim was to report on and draw conclusions from two expert meetings that reflected on earlier mapped issues in order to reach consensus, and to advise on the QALY's future use in palliative care., Methods: A nominal group approach was used. In order to facilitate group decision making, three statements regarding the use of the QALY in palliative care were discussed in a structured way. Two groups of international policymakers, healthcare professionals and researchers participated. Data were analysed qualitatively using inductive coding., Results: 1) Most experts agreed that the recommended measurement tool for the QALYs 'Q' component, the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D), is inappropriate for palliative care. A more sensitive tool, which might be based on the capabilities approach, could be used or developed. 2) Valuation of time should be incorporated in the 'Q' part, leaving the linear clock time in the 'LY' component. 3) Most experts agreed that the QALY, in its current shape, is not suitable for palliative care., Conclusions: 1) Although the EQ-5D does not suffice, a generic tool is needed for the QALY. As long as no suitable alternative is available, other tools can be used besides or serve as basis for the EQ-5D because of issues in conceptual overlap. 2) Future research should further investigate the valuation of time issue, and how best to integrate it in the 'Q' component. 3) A generic outcome measure of effectiveness is essential to justly allocate healthcare resources. However, experts emphasized, the QALY is and should be one of multiple criteria for choices in the healthcare insurance package.

Background: Care costs rise towards the end of life. International comparison of service use, costs and care experiences can inform quality and improve access., Aim: The aim of this study was to compare health and social care costs, quality and their drivers in the last 3 months of life for older adults across countries. Null hypothesis: no difference between countries., Design: Mortality follow-back survey. Costs were calculated from carers' reported service use and unit costs., Setting: Palliative care services in England (London), Ireland (Dublin) and the United States (New York, San Francisco)., Participants: Informal carers of decedents who had received palliative care participated in the study., Results: A total of 767 questionnaires were returned: 245 in England, 282 in Ireland and 240 in the United States. Mean care costs per person with cancer/non-cancer were US$37,250/US$37,376 (the United States), US$29,065/US$29,411 (Ireland), US$15,347/US$16,631 (England) and differed significantly ( F  = 25.79/14.27, p  < 0.000). Cost distributions differed and were most homogeneous in England. In all countries, hospital care accounted for > 80% of total care costs; community care 6%-16%, palliative care 1%-15%; 10% of decedents used ~30% of total care costs. Being a high-cost user was associated with older age (>80 years), facing financial difficulties and poor experiences of home care, but not with having cancer or multimorbidity. Palliative care services consistently had the highest satisfaction., Conclusion: Poverty and poor home care drove high costs, suggesting that improving community palliative care may improve care value, especially as palliative care expenditure was low. Major diagnostic variables were not cost drivers. Care costs in the United States were high and highly variable, suggesting that high-cost low-value care may be prevalent.

The National Cancer Institute estimates that $154 billion will be spent on care for people with cancer in 2019, distributed across the year after diagnosis (31%), the final year of life (31%), and continuing care between those two (38%). Projections of future costs estimate persistent growth in care expenditures. Early research studies on the economics of palliative care have reported a general pattern of cost savings during inpatient hospital admissions and the end-of-life phase. Recent research has demonstrated more complex dynamics, but expanding palliative care capacity to meet clinical guidelines and population health needs seems to save costs. Quantifying these cost savings requires additional research, because there is significant variance in estimates of the effects of treatment on costs, depending on the timing of intervention, the primary diagnosis, and the overall illness burden. Because ASCO guidelines state that palliative care should be provided concurrently with other treatment from the point of diagnosis onward for all metastatic cancer, new and ambitious research is required to evaluate the cost effects of palliative care across the entire disease trajectory. We propose a series of ways to reach the guideline goals.

Importance: The use of intensive care at the end of life continues to be common. Although the provision of palliative care has been advocated as a way to mitigate the use of high-intensity care, it is unknown whether implementation of hospital-based palliative care services is associated with reduced use of intensive care at the end of life., Objective: To determine whether implementation of hospital-based palliative care services is associated with decreased intensive care unit (ICU) use during terminal hospitalizations., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included 51 hospitals in New York State that either did or did not implement a palliative care program between 2008 and 2014. Hospitals that consistently had a palliative care program during the study period were excluded. Participants were adult patients who died during hospitalization. Data analysis was performed between January 2018 and July 2019., Exposure: Implementation of a palliative care program., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was ICU use. A difference-in-differences analysis was performed using multilevel regression to assess the association between implementing a palliative care program and ICU use during terminal hospitalizations while adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics and time trends., Results: During the study period, 73 370 patients (mean [SD] age, 76.5 [14.1] years; 38 467 [52.4%] women) died during hospitalization, of whom 37 628 (51.3%) received care in hospitals that implemented palliative care services and 35 742 (48.7%) received care in a hospital without palliative care implementation. Patients who received care in hospitals after implementation of palliative care services were less likely to receive intensive care than patients admitted to the same hospitals before implementation (49.3% vs 52.8%; difference 3.5%; 95% CI, 2.5%-4.5%; P < .001). Compared with hospitals that never had a palliative care program, the implementation of palliative care was associated with a 10% reduction in ICU use during terminal hospitalizations (adjusted relative risk, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.85-0.95; P < .001)., Conclusions and Relevance: The implementation of hospital-based palliative care services in New York State was associated with a modest reduction in ICU use during terminal hospitalizations.

Background: Palliative care program service delivery is variable, and programs often lack data to support and guide program development and growth. Objective: To review the development and key features of the National Palliative Care Registry™ ("the Registry") and describe recent findings from its surveys on hospital palliative care. Description: Established in 2008, the Registry data elements align with National Consensus Project (NCP) guidelines related to palliative care program structures and operations. The Registry provides longitudinal and comparative data that palliative care programs can use to support programmatic growth. Results: As of 2018, >1000 hospitals and 120 community sites have submitted data on their palliative care programs to the Registry. Over the past decade, the percentage of hospital admissions seen by palliative care teams (penetration) has increased from 2.5% to 5.3%. Higher penetration is correlated with teaching hospital status, having a palliative care trigger, and hospital size ( p  < 0.05). Although overall staffing has expanded, only 42% of Registry programs include the recommended four key disciplines: physician, advanced practice or other registered nurse, social worker, and chaplain. Compliance with NCP guidelines on key structures and processes vary across adult and pediatric programs. Conclusions: The Registry allows palliative care programs to optimize core structures and processes and understand their performance relative to their peers.

Background: In the U.S., more children die from cancer than from any other disease, and more than one third die in the hospital setting. These data have been replicated even in subpopulations of children with cancer enrolled on a palliative care service. Children with cancer who die in high-acuity inpatient settings often experience suffering at the end of life, with increased psychosocial morbidities seen in their bereaved parents. Strategies to preemptively identify children with cancer who are more likely to die in high-acuity inpatient settings have not been explored., Materials and Methods: A standardized tool was used to gather demographic, disease, treatment, and end-of-life variables for 321 pediatric palliative oncology (PPO) patients treated at an academic pediatric cancer center who died between 2011 and 2015. Multinomial logistic regression was used to predict patient subgroups at increased risk for pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) death., Results: Higher odds of dying in the PICU were found in patients with Hispanic ethnicity (odds ratio [OR], 4.02; p  = .002), hematologic malignancy (OR, 7.42; p  < .0001), history of hematopoietic stem cell transplant (OR, 4.52; p  < .0001), total number of PICU hospitalizations (OR, 1.98; p  < .0001), receipt of cancer-directed therapy during the last month of life (OR, 2.96; p  = .002), and palliative care involvement occurring less than 30 days before death (OR, 4.7; p  < .0001). Conversely, lower odds of dying in the PICU were found in patients with hospice involvement (OR, 0.02; p  < .0001) and documentation of advance directives at the time of death (OR, 0.37; p  = .033)., Conclusion: Certain variables may predict PICU death for PPO patients, including delayed palliative care involvement. Preemptive identification of patients at risk for PICU death affords opportunities to study the effects of earlier palliative care integration and increased discussions around preferred location of death on end-of-life outcomes for children with cancer and their families., Implications for Practice: Children with cancer who die in high-acuity inpatient settings often experience a high burden of intensive therapy at the end of life. Strategies to identify patients at higher risk of dying in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) have not been explored previously. This study finds that certain variables may predict PICU death for pediatric palliative oncology patients, including delayed palliative care involvement. Preemptive identification of patients at risk for PICU death affords opportunities to study the effects of earlier palliative care integration and increased discussions around preferred location of death on end-of-life outcomes for children with cancer and their families., Competing Interests: Disclosures of potential conflicts of interest may be found at the end of this article., (© AlphaMed Press 2018.)

Background: The evidence base to support high-quality clinical care and number of scientists available to develop this evidence base are inadequate., Objective: To describe the first 10 years of the National Palliative Care Research Center's (NPCRC) programs and their outcomes., Design: Established in 2005, NPCRC was created in direct response to the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine. Specifically, NPCRC was created to expand the palliative care evidence-based needed for both health policy and clinical practice by supporting research scientists, stimulating research and innovation, and creating a community of researchers focused on the needs of persons with serious illness and their families., Measurements: Subsequent grant funding following NPCRC investment (web searches of NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools [RePORT], Veterans Administration and Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute [PCORI] grant databases, grantee on-line surveys, and grantee annual reports) promotions (grantee on-line surveys and annual reports), publications (PubMed searches), and NPCRC participant satisfaction (grantee questionnaires)., Results: As of July 2017, NPCRC has funded 47 junior investigators representing over 10 disciplines. These investigators have leveraged NPCRC's $7.8 million investment into 52 federal grants totaling $74.8 million dollars and 69 foundation grants totaling $16 million. Thirty-five grants ($5.8 million) have been awarded to experienced investigators, resulting in additional grant funding of $104.5 million dollars ($78.5 million federal, $26 million nonfederal). Satisfaction with NPCRC's program has been uniformly high and policy efforts have resulted in enhanced federal funding opportunities in palliative care research., Conclusions: NPCRC's focus on people and infrastructure in conjunction with a top-down bottom-up strategy has been critical in improving the palliative care evidence base.

Rationale: In the intensive care unit (ICU), studies involving specialized palliative care services have shown decreases in the use of nonbeneficial life-sustaining therapies and ICU length of stay for patients. However, whether widespread availability of hospital-based palliative care is associated with less frequent use of high intensity care is unknown., Objectives: To determine whether availability of hospital-based palliative care is associated with decreased markers of treatment intensity for ICU patients., Methods: Retrospective cohort study of adult ICU patients in New York State hospitals, 2008-2014. Multilevel regression was used to assess the relationship between availability of hospital-based palliative care during the year of admission and hospital length of stay, use of mechanical ventilation, dialysis and artificial nutrition, placement of a tracheostomy or gastrostomy tube, days in ICU and discharge to hospice., Results: Of 1,025,503 ICU patients in 151 hospitals, 814,794 (79.5%) received care in a hospital with a palliative care program. Hospital length of stay was similar for patients in hospitals with and without palliative care programs (6 d [interquartile range, 3-12] vs. 6 d [interquartile range, 3-11]; adjusted rate ratio, 1.04 [95% confidence interval 1.03-1.05]; P < 0.001), as were other healthcare use outcomes. However, patients in hospitals with palliative care programs were 46% more likely to be discharged to hospice than those in hospitals without palliative care programs (1.7% vs. 1.4%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.46 [95% confidence interval 1.30-1.64]; P < 0.001)., Conclusions: The availability of hospital-based palliative care was not associated with differences in in-hospital treatment intensity, but it was associated with significantly increased hospice use for ICU patients. Currently, the measurable benefit of palliative care programs for critically ill patients may be the increased use of hospice facilities, as opposed to decreased healthcare use during an ICU-associated hospitalization.

Context: Early integration of palliative care (PC) in the management of children with high-risk cancer is widely endorsed by patients, families, clinicians, and national organizations. However, optimal timing for PC consultation is not standardized, and variables that influence timing of PC integration for children with cancer remain unknown., Objectives: To investigate associations between demographic, disease, treatment, and end-of-life attributes and timing of PC consultation for children with high-risk cancer enrolled on a PC service., Methods: A comprehensive standardized tool was used to abstract data from the medical records of 321 patients treated at a large academic pediatric cancer center, who died between 2011 and 2015., Results: Gender, race, ethnicity, enrollment on a Phase I protocol, number of high-acuity hospitalizations, and receipt of cardiopulmonary resuscitation were not associated with timing of PC involvement. Patients with hematologic malignancy, those who received cancer-directed therapy during the last month of life, and those with advance directives documented one week or less before death had higher odds of late PC referral (malignancy: odds ratio [OR] 3.24, P = 0.001; therapy: OR 4.65, P < 0.001; directive: OR 4.81, P < 0.0001). Patients who received hospice services had lower odds of late PC referral <30 days before death (OR 0.31, P < 0.001)., Conclusion: Hematologic malignancy, cancer-directed therapy at the end of life, and delayed documentation of advance directives are associated with late PC involvement in children who died of cancer. Identification of these variables affords opportunities to study targeted interventions to enhance access to earlier PC resources and services for children with high-risk cancer and their families., (Copyright © 2018 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Economics of care for adults with serious illness is a policy priority worldwide. Palliative care may lower costs for hospitalized adults, but the evidence has important limitations., Objective: To estimate the association of palliative care consultation (PCC) with direct hospital costs for adults with serious illness., Data Sources: Systematic searches of the Embase, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, PubMed, CINAHL, and EconLit databases were performed for English-language journal articles using keywords in the domains of palliative care (eg, palliative, terminal) and economics (eg, cost, utilization), with limiters for hospital and consultation. For Embase, PsycINFO, and CENTRAL, we searched without a time limitation. For PubMed, CINAHL, and EconLit, we searched for articles published after August 1, 2013. Data analysis was performed from April 8, 2017, to September 16, 2017., Study Selection: Economic evaluations of interdisciplinary PCC for hospitalized adults with at least 1 of 7 illnesses (cancer; heart, liver, or kidney failure; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; AIDS/HIV; or selected neurodegenerative conditions) in the hospital inpatient setting vs usual care only, controlling for a minimum list of confounders., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Eight eligible studies were identified, all cohort studies, of which 6 provided sufficient information for inclusion. The study estimated the association of PCC within 3 days of admission with direct hospital costs for each sample and for subsamples defined by primary diagnoses and number of comorbidities at admission, controlling for confounding with an instrumental variable when available and otherwise propensity score weighting. Treatment effect estimates were pooled in the meta-analysis., Main Outcomes and Measures: Total direct hospital costs., Results: This study included 6 samples with a total 133 118 patients (range, 1020-82 273), of whom 93.2% were discharged alive (range, 89.0%-98.4%), 40.8% had a primary diagnosis of cancer (range, 15.7%-100.0%), and 3.6% received a PCC (range, 2.2%-22.3%). Mean Elixhauser index scores ranged from 2.2 to 3.5 among the studies. When patients were pooled irrespective of diagnosis, there was a statistically significant reduction in costs (-$3237; 95% CI, -$3581 to -$2893; P < .001). In the stratified analyses, there was a reduction in costs for the cancer (-$4251; 95% CI, -$4664 to -$3837; P < .001) and noncancer (-$2105; 95% CI, -$2698 to -$1511; P < .001) subsamples. The reduction in cost was greater in those with 4 or more comorbidities than for those with 2 or fewer., Conclusions and Relevance: The estimated association of early hospital PCC with hospital costs may vary according to baseline clinical factors. Estimates may be larger for primary diagnosis of cancer and more comorbidities compared with primary diagnosis of noncancer and fewer comorbidities. Increasing palliative care capacity to meet national guidelines may reduce costs for hospitalized adults with serious and complex illnesses.

Introduction: Palliative radiation therapy (PRT) is a commonly utilized intervention for symptom palliation among patients with metastatic cancer, yet it is under-recognized as a distinct area of subspecialty within radiation oncology., Objective: We developed a multidisciplinary service model within radiation oncology called the Palliative Radiation Oncology Consult (PROC) service to improve the quality of cancer care for advanced cancer patients. We assessed the service's impact on patient-related and healthcare utilization outcomes., Design: Patients were included in this observational cohort study if they received PRT at a single tertiary care hospital between 2009 and 2017. We compared outcomes of patients treated after (post-intervention group) to those treated before (control group) PROC's establishment using unadjusted and propensity score adjusted analyses., Results: Of the 450 patients in the cohort, 154 receive PRT pre- and 296 after PROC's establishment. In comparison to patients treated pre-PROC, post-PROC patients were more likely to undergo single-fraction radiation (RR: 7.74, 95% CI: 3.84-15.57) and hypofraction (2-5 fraction) radiation (RR: 10.74, 95% CI: 5.82-19.83), require shorter hospital stays (21 vs. 26.5 median days, p = 0.01), and receive more timely specialty-level palliative care (OR: 2.65, 95% CI: 1.56-4.49). Despite shortened treatments, symptom relief was similar (OR: 1.35, 95% CI: 0.80-2.28)., Conclusion: The PROC service was associated with more efficient radiation courses, substantially reduced hospital length of stays, and more timely palliative care consultation, without compromising symptom improvements. These results suggest that a multidisciplinary care delivery model can lead to enhanced quality of care for advanced cancer patients.

Background: The field of pediatric palliative oncology is newly emerging. Little is known about the characteristics and illness experiences of children with cancer who receive palliative care (PC)., Methods: A retrospective cohort study of 321 pediatric oncology patients enrolled in PC who died between 2011 and 2015 was conducted at a large academic pediatric cancer center using a comprehensive standardized data extraction tool., Results: The majority of pediatric palliative oncology patients received experimental therapy (79.4%), with 40.5% enrolled on a phase I trial. Approximately one-third received cancer-directed therapy during the last month of life (35.5%). More than half had at least one intensive care unit hospitalization (51.4%), with this subset demonstrating considerable exposure to mechanical ventilation (44.8%), invasive procedures (20%), and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (12.1%). Of the 122 patients who died in the hospital, 44.3% died in the intensive care unit. Patients with late PC involvement occurring less than 30 days before death had higher odds of dying in the intensive care unit over the home/hospice setting compared to those with earlier PC involvement (OR: 4.7, 95% CI: 2.47-8.97, P < 0.0001)., Conclusions: Children with cancer who receive PC experience a high burden of intensive treatments and often die in inpatient intensive care settings. Delayed PC involvement is associated with increased odds of dying in the intensive care unit. Prospective investigation of early PC involvement in children with high-risk cancer is needed to better understand potential impacts on cost-effectiveness, quality of life, and delivery of goal concordant care., (© 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Objective: To identify barrier to achieving universal access to high quality palliative care in Canada, review published national strategies and frameworks to promote palliative care, examine key aspects that have been linked to successful outcomes, and make recommendations for Canada., Background: In 2014, the World Health Organization called on members to develop and implement policies to ensure palliative care is integrated into national health services., Methods: Rapid review supplemented by the author's personal files, outreach to colleagues within the international palliative care community, review of European Association for Palliative Care publications, and a subsequent search of the table of contents of the major palliative care journals., Results: Frameworks were found for 10 countries ranging from detailed and comprehensive multi-year strategies to more general approaches including laws guaranteeing access to palliative care services for "dying" patients or recommendations for the development of clinical infrastructure. Few formal evaluations were found minimal comparative data exist regarding the quality of care, access to palliative care services, timing of access in the disease trajectory, and patient and family satisfaction with care. Factors that appear to be associated with success include: 1) input and early involvement of senior policy makers; 2) comprehensive strategies that address major barriers to universal access and that involve the key constituents; 3) a focus on enhancing the evidence base and developing a national system of quality reporting; and 4) substantial and sustained government investment., Discussion: Comprehensive national strategies appear to improve access to high quality palliative care for persons with serious illness and their families. Such strategies require sustained government funding and address barriers related to infrastructure, professional and public education, workforce shortages, and an inadequate evidence base.

Background: Palliative care is associated with improved patient and family outcomes and lower cost of care, but studies estimate that <50% of hospitalized adults in the United States who are appropriate for palliative care receive it. Few studies have addressed demographic and clinical factors associated with receipt of palliative care., Objective: Our aim was to identify characteristics of hospitalized advanced cancer patients that are associated with referral to an interdisciplinary hospital-based palliative care team., Methods: The data are from a prospective observational study of hospitalized advanced cancer patients in five hospitals. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate the relationship between patient characteristics and palliative care referral., Results: The sample includes 3096 patients; 81% received usual care and 19% were referred to palliative care. Advanced cancer patients were twice as likely to receive palliative care referral if, at admission, they needed assistance with transfer from bed (p = 0.002) and about 1.5 times as likely if they were taking medication for pain (p = 0.002), nausea (p = 0.04), or constipation (p = 0.04). Patients with more comorbidities (p = 0.001) and higher symptom burden (p = 0.001) were more likely to be referred., Conclusion: Advanced cancer patients were more likely to be referred to the palliative care consultation team if they had high symptom burden at hospital admission. Overall a minority of advanced cancer patients were referred. Standardized screening for palliative care may be needed to ensure that advanced cancer patients receive the highest quality of evidence based care.

Background: Although family satisfaction is recognized as a critical indicator of quality for patients with advanced cancer, it is rarely assessed as part of routine clinical care. Measurement burden may be one barrier to widespread use of family satisfaction measures., Objective: The goal of this study was to test the ability of a new, brief 5-item measure of family satisfaction with care to accurately capture differences across hospital settings., Design: Using data from the Palliative Care for Cancer Patients study, a prospective study of 1979 patients and caregivers, we used multivariate regression analysis to detect significant differences across five sites., Settings: Hospitalized patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers Methods: We used both the shortened 5-item version of the FAMCARE scale (previously developed using Item Response Theory) and the original 20-item FAMCARE to measure family satisfaction., Results: On the 5-item FAMCARE, sites ranged from mean scores of 5.5-6.9 out of a possible high score of 10. Family members at one care site (n = 783) were significantly (p < 0.05) less satisfied with their care than family members at four other care sites. The original 20-item measure failed to differentiate satisfaction levels between all hospital sites., Discussion: Variability in family satisfaction with advanced cancer care across hospital settings can be more sensitively detected using a brief 5-item questionnaire versus longer measures. The development of less lengthy and burdensome measures for monitoring family satisfaction, which are still valid, can facilitate routine assessments to maintain and promote high-quality care across care settings.

In 2014 the World Health Organization called for palliative care to be integrated as an essential element of the health care continuum. Yet in 2017 US palliative care services are found largely in hospitals, and hospice care, which is delivered primarily in the home, is limited to people who are dying soon. The majority of Americans with a serious illness are not dying; are living at home, in assisted living facilities, or in nursing homes; and have limited access to palliative care. Most health care providers lack knowledge about and skills in pain and symptom management, communication, and care coordination, and both the public and health professionals are only vaguely aware of the benefits of palliative care and how and when to access it. The lack of policy supports for palliative care contributes to preventable suffering and low-value care. In this article we outline the need for a national palliative care strategy to ensure reliable access to high-quality palliative care for Americans with serious medical illnesses. We review approaches employed by other countries, list the participants needed to develop and implement an actionable strategy, and identify analogous US national health initiatives to inform a process for implementing the strategy., (Project HOPE—The People-to-People Health Foundation, Inc.)

Purpose: Hospitalized patients with advanced cancer have a high symptom burden and need for support. Integration of palliative care (PC) improves symptom control and decreases unwanted health care use, yet many patients are never offered these services. In 2016, ASCO called for incorporation of PC into oncologic care for all patients with metastatic cancer. To improve the quality of cancer care, we developed standardized criteria, or triggers, for PC consultation on the inpatient solid tumor service., Methods: Patients were eligible for this prospective cohort study if they met at least one of the following eligibility criteria: had an advanced solid tumor; prior hospitalization within 30 days; hospitalization > 7 days; and active symptoms. During the intervention, patients who met the criteria received automatic PC consultation., Results: When we compared patients in the intervention group with control subjects, there were increases in PC consultations (19 of 48 [39%] to 52 of 65 [80%]; P ≤ .001) and hospice referrals (seven of 48 [14%] to 17 of 65 [26%]; P = .03), and there were declines in 30-day readmission rates (17 of 48 [35%] to 13 of 65 [18%]; P = .04) and receipt of chemotherapy after discharge (21 of 48 [44%] to 12 of 65 [18%]; P = .03). There was an overall increase in support measures following discharge ( P = .004). Length of stay was unaffected., Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is the first study to demonstrate that among patients with advanced cancer admitted to an inpatient oncology service, the standardized use of triggers for PC consultation is associated with substantial impact on 30-day readmission rates, chemotherapy following discharge, hospice referrals, and use of support services following discharge. Expansion of this model to other hospitals and health systems should improve the value of cancer care.

Background: Use of administrative data to study the effectiveness of specialized palliative care is limited by the lack of a reliable method to identify patients receiving palliative care consultation. The International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) code V66.7 has been used, but its validity for this purpose is unknown., Objective: To examine the validity of the ICD-9 code V66.7 for identifying whether hospitalized patients received palliative care consultation., Design: Retrospective cohort study., Setting/subjects: All patients of age ≥18 years admitted to a single academic medical center between August 2013 and August 2015., Measurements: Sensitivity and specificity of the V66.7 code for palliative care consultation for all patients and several a priori identified subgroups. The reference standard was the presence of a palliative care consultation note in the electronic medical record., Results: Of 100,910 admissions, 1999 received a palliative care consultation (2.0%) and 1846 (1.8%) had usage of the V66.7 code. Sensitivity and specificity for the V66.7 code were 49.9% and 99.1%, respectively. Sensitivity was considerably higher for certain subgroups, such as patients with dementia (76.3%) and metastatic cancer (66.3%); addition of age restrictions further improved sensitivity while maintaining high specificity. Specificity was substantially lower for patients who died during hospitalization (sensitivity 53.9%, specificity 75.1%)., Conclusions: In a single center, the ICD-9 code V66.7 had poor sensitivity and high specificity for identifying hospitalized patients who received a palliative care consultation. Appropriate use of this code for this purpose should take these characteristics into consideration.

Background: Studies report cost-savings from hospital-based palliative care consultation teams compared to usual care only, but drivers of observed differences are unclear., Aim: To analyse cost-differences associated with palliative care consultation teams using two research questions: (Q1) What is the association between early palliative care consultation team intervention, and intensity of services and length of stay, compared to usual care only? (Q2) What is the association between early palliative care consultation team intervention and day-to-day hospital costs, compared to a later intervention?, Design: Prospective multi-site cohort study (2007-2011). Patients who received a consultation were placed in the intervention group, those who did not in the comparison group. Intervention group was stratified by timing, and groups were matched using propensity scores., Setting/participants: Adults admitted to three US hospitals with advanced cancer. Principle analytic sample contains 863 patients ( n UC  = 637; n PC EARLY  = 177; n PC LATE  = 49) discharged alive., Results: Cost-savings from early palliative care accrue due to both reduced length of stay and reduced intensity of treatment, with an estimated 63% of savings associated with shorter length of stay. A reduction in day-to-day costs is observable in the days immediately following initial consult but does not persist indefinitely. A comparison of early and late palliative care consultation team cost-effects shows negligible difference once the intervention is administered., Conclusion: Reduced length of stay is the biggest driver of cost-saving from early consultation for patients with advanced cancer. Patient- and family-centred discussions on goals of care and transition planning initiated by palliative care consultation teams may be at least as important in driving cost-savings as the reduction of unnecessary tests and pharmaceuticals identified by previous studies.

Background: patient empowerment, through which patients become self-determining agents with some control over their health and healthcare, is a common theme across health policies globally. Most care for older people is in the acute setting, but there is little evidence to inform the delivery of empowering hospital care., Objective: we aimed to explore challenges to and facilitators of empowerment among older people with advanced disease in hospital, and the impact of palliative care., Methods: we conducted an ethnography in six hospitals in England, Ireland and the USA. The ethnography involved: interviews with patients aged ≥65, informal caregivers, specialist palliative care (SPC) staff and other clinicians who cared for older adults with advanced disease, and fieldwork. Data were analysed using directed thematic analysis., Results: analysis of 91 interviews and 340 h of observational data revealed substantial challenges to empowerment: poor communication and information provision, combined with routinised and fragmented inpatient care, restricted patients' self-efficacy, self-management, choice and decision-making. Information and knowledge were often necessary for empowerment, but not sufficient: empowerment depended on patient-centredness being enacted at an organisational and staff level. SPC facilitated empowerment by prioritising patient-centred care, tailored communication and information provision, and the support of other clinicians., Conclusions: empowering older people in the acute setting requires changes throughout the health system. Facilitators of empowerment include excellent staff-patient communication, patient-centred, relational care, an organisational focus on patient experience rather than throughput, and appropriate access to SPC. Findings have relevance for many high- and middle-income countries with a growing population of older patients with advanced disease., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com)

Background: Palliative care is associated with decreased treatment intensity and improved quality for individual patients at the end of life, but little is known about how hospital-wide outcomes are affected by the diffusion of palliative care principles., Objective: We examined the relationship between presence of palliative care programs and hospitals' average treatment intensity, as indicated by mean intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS) and days under Medicare hospice coverage, in the last six months of life among Medicare beneficiaries aged 67 and over with serious chronic illness., Methods: We linked hospital-level data from the American Hospital Association Annual Survey, National Palliative Care Registry, and Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care to examine hospital-level treatment intensity for chronically ill Medicare beneficiaries who died in 2010. We used propensity score-adjusted linear regression to estimate the relationship between palliative care programs and hospitals' mean ICU LOS and hospice length of enrollment., Results: Among 974 hospitals meeting inclusion criteria, we compared 295 hospitals with palliative care programs to 679 hospitals without. Hospitals with palliative care programs were higher volume, more likely to be teaching hospitals, and have oncology services and less likely to be located in rural areas. In propensity score weighted analyses, the mean ICU LOS in hospitals with palliative care was shorter by 0.23 days (standard error [SE] = 0.26), but this was not statistically significant (p = 0.76). In addition, the mean length of hospice enrollment among beneficiaries served by hospitals with palliative care was longer by 0.22 days (SE = 0.61), but also was not statistically significant (p = 0.76)., Conclusions: Hospital-based palliative care programs alone may not be sufficient to impact ICU LOS or hospice length of enrollment for all chronically ill older adults admitted to hospitals. Future work should measure hospital-wide palliative care outcomes and effects of core palliative knowledge and skills provided by nonpalliative care specialists.

Background: Palliative care is expanding rapidly in the United States., Objective: To examine variation in access to hospital palliative care., Methods: Data were obtained from the American Hospital Association (AHA) Annual Surveys™ for Fiscal Years 2012 and 2013, the National Palliative Care Registry™, the Dartmouth Atlas of Healthcare, the American Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS), web searches, and telephone interviews of hospital administrators and program directors. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine predictors of hospital palliative care programs., Results: Sixty-seven percent of hospitals with 50 or more total facility beds reported a palliative care program. Institutional characteristics were strongly associated with the presence of a hospital palliative care program. Ninety percent of hospitals with 300 beds or more were found to have palliative care programs as compared to 56% of hospitals with fewer than 300 beds. Tax status was also a significant predictor. Not-for-profit hospitals and public hospitals were, respectively, 4.8 times and 7.1 times more likely to have a palliative care program as compared to for-profit hospitals. Palliative care penetration was highest in the New England (88% of hospitals), Pacific (77% of hospitals), and mid-Atlantic (77% of hospitals) states and lowest in the west south central (43% of hospitals) and east south central (42% of hospitals) states., Conclusions: This study demonstrates continued steady growth in the number of hospital palliative care programs in the United States, with almost universal access to services in large U.S. hospitals and academic medical centers. Nevertheless access to palliative care remains uneven and depends on accidents of geography and hospital ownership.

Patients with multiple serious conditions account for a high proportion of health care spending. Such spending is projected to continue to grow substantially as a result of increased insurance eligibility, the ever-rising cost of care, the continued use of nonbeneficial high-intensity treatments at the end of life, and demographic changes. We evaluated the impact of palliative care consultation on hospital costs for adults with advanced cancer, excluding those with dementia. We found that compared to usual care, the receipt of a palliative care consultation within two days of admission was associated with 22 percent lower costs for patients with a comorbidity score of 2-3 and with 32 percent lower costs for those with a score of 4 or higher. Earlier consultation was also found to be systematically associated with a larger cost-saving effect for all subsamples defined by multimorbidity. Given ongoing workforce shortages, targeting early specialist palliative care to hospitalized patients with advanced cancer and higher numbers of serious concurrent conditions could improve care while complementing strategies to curb the growth of health spending., (Project HOPE—The People-to-People Health Foundation, Inc.)

Background: Over the past decade over two-thirds of U.S. hospitals have established palliative care programs. National data on palliative care program staffing and its association with operational outcomes are limited., Objective: The objective of this report is to examine the impact of palliative care program staffing on access to palliative care in U.S. hospitals., Methods: Data from the National Palliative Care Registry™ for 2014 were used to calculate staffing levels, palliative care service penetration, and time to initial palliative care consultation for 398 palliative care programs operating across 482 U.S. hospitals., Results: Hospital-based palliative care programs reported an average service penetration of 4.4%. Higher staffing levels were associated with higher service penetration; higher service penetration was associated with shorter time to initial palliative care consultation., Discussion: This report demonstrates that operational effectiveness, as measured by staffing and palliative care service penetration, is associated with shorter time to palliative care consultation.

Purpose: Previous studies report that early palliative care is associated with clinical benefits, but there is limited evidence on economic impact. This article addresses the research question: Does timing of palliative care have an impact on its effect on cost?, Patients and Methods: Using a prospective, observational design, clinical and cost data were collected for adult patients with an advanced cancer diagnosis admitted to five US hospitals from 2007 to 2011. The sample for economic evaluation was 969 patients; 256 were seen by a palliative care consultation team, and 713 received usual care only. Subsamples were created according to time to consult after admission. Propensity score weights were calculated, matching the treatment and comparison arms specific to each subsample on observed confounders. Generalized linear models with a γ distribution and a log link were applied to estimate the mean treatment effect on cost within subsamples., Results: Earlier consultation is associated with a larger effect on total direct cost. Intervention within 6 days is estimated to reduce costs by -$1,312 (95% CI, -$2,568 to -$56; P = .04) compared with no intervention and intervention within 2 days by -$2,280 (95% CI, -$3,438 to -$1,122; P < .001); these reductions are equivalent to a 14% and a 24% reduction, respectively, in cost of hospital stay., Conclusion: Earlier palliative care consultation during hospital admission is associated with lower cost of hospital stay for patients admitted with an advanced cancer diagnosis. These findings are consistent with a growing body of research on quality and survival suggesting that early palliative care should be more widely implemented., (© 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Background: The American College of Emergency Physicians and the American Society of Clinical Oncology recommend early palliative care consultation for patients with advanced, life-limiting illnesses, such as metastatic cancer., Objectives: The objectives were to assess the process of early referral from the emergency department (ED) to palliative care for patients with advanced, incurable cancer as part of a randomized controlled trial and to compare the proportion and timing of consultation to a care as usual group., Methods: A single-blind randomized controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT01358110) compared early, ED-based referrals to palliative care for patients admitted with advanced, incurable cancer to physician-driven consultation (i.e., care as usual). Participants had to speak English or Spanish and have no history of palliative care consultation. They were randomized via balanced block randomization to the intervention or control group. Each intervention subject was referred by a research staff member to the palliative care team for consultation. The usual care group received palliative care only if requested by the admitting physician. Analysis was based on intention to treat. A chart review was performed to assess proportion and timing of palliative care consults during the index admission, defined as: (1) completed palliative care consult documented in the chart and (2) days from admission to palliative care consult., Results: A total of 134 participants were enrolled and randomized. For patients in the intervention group, 88% (60 of 68) had documented palliative care consultations during their index admissions (95% confidence interval [CI] = 80.5 to 95.5), compared to 18% (12 of 66) in the control group (95% CI = 8.8 to 27.5; p < 0.01). The 60 intervention patients received palliative care consultations on average 1.48 days from admission (95% CI = 1.19 to 1.76), compared to 2.9 days from admission in the 12 control patients (95% CI = 1.03 to 4.79; p = 0.15)., Conclusions: This study documented a low baseline rate of palliative care involvement as part of usual care in patients with advanced cancer being admitted from the ED. Early referral to palliative care in the context of a research study significantly increased the likelihood that patients received a consult, thus meriting further investigation of how to generalize this approach., (© 2015 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.)

We report the challenges of the Working to Improve Discussions About Defibrillator Management trial, our novel, multicenter trial aimed at improving communication between cardiology clinicians and their patients with advanced heart failure (HF) who have implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs). The study objectives are (1) to increase ICD deactivation conversations, (2) to increase the number of ICDs deactivated, and (3) to improve psychological outcomes in bereaved caregivers. The unit of randomization is the hospital, the intervention is aimed at HF clinicians, and the patient and caregiver are the units of analysis. Three hospitals were randomized to usual care and three to intervention. The intervention consists of an interactive educational session, clinician reminders, and individualized feedback. We enroll patients with advanced HF and their caregivers, and then we regularly survey them to evaluate whether the intervention has improved communication between them and their HF providers. We encountered three implementation barriers. First, there were institutional review board concerns at two sites because of the palliative nature of the study. Second, we had difficulty in creating entry criteria that accurately identified an HF population at high risk of dying. Third, we had to adapt our entry criteria to the changing landscape of ventricular assist devices and cardiac transplant eligibility. Here we present our novel solutions to the difficulties we encountered. Our work has the ability to enhance conduct of future studies focusing on improving care for patients with advanced illness., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: To model the steps involved in preparing for and carrying out propensity score analyses by providing step-by-step guidance and Stata code applied to an empirical dataset., Study Design: Guidance, Stata code, and empirical examples are given to illustrate (1) the process of choosing variables to include in the propensity score; (2) balance of propensity score across treatment and comparison groups; (3) balance of covariates across treatment and comparison groups within blocks of the propensity score; (4) choice of matching and weighting strategies; (5) balance of covariates after matching or weighting the sample; and (6) interpretation of treatment effect estimates., Empirical Application: We use data from the Palliative Care for Cancer Patients (PC4C) study, a multisite observational study of the effect of inpatient palliative care on patient health outcomes and health services use, to illustrate the development and use of a propensity score., Conclusions: Propensity scores are one useful tool for accounting for observed differences between treated and comparison groups. Careful testing of propensity scores is required before using them to estimate treatment effects., (© Health Research and Educational Trust.)

Background: Maintaining the recent expansion of palliative care access in the United States is a recognized public health concern. Economic evaluation is essential to validate current provision and assess the case for new programs. Previous economic reviews in palliative care reported on programs across settings and systems; none has examined specifically the hospital consultative model, the dominant model of provision in the United States., Objectives: To review systematically the economic evidence on specialist palliative care consultation teams in the hospital setting, to appraise this evidence critically, and to identify areas for future research in this field., Data Sources: A meta-review ("a review of existing reviews") was conducted of eight published systematic reviews and one relevant nonsystematic review. To identify articles published outside of the timeframe of these reviews, systematic searches were performed on the PubMed, CINAHL, and EconLit databases., Study Selection: Articles were included if they compared the costs and/or cost effectiveness of a specialist hospital inpatient palliative care consultation for adult patients with those of a comparator., Results: Ten studies were included and these demonstrate a clear pattern of cost-saving impact from inpatient consultation programs. Nevertheless, knowledge gaps still exist regarding the economic effects of these programs. Current evidence has been generated from the hospital perspective; health system costs, patient and caregiver costs, and health outcomes are typically not included., Conclusions: Inpatient palliative care consultation programs have been shown to save hospitals money and to provide improved care to patients with serious illness. With a clear pattern of cost-saving using current methodology, it is timely to begin expanding the scope of economic evaluation in this field. Future research must address the measurement of both costs and outcomes to understand more fully the role that palliative care plays in enhancing value in health care. Relevant domains for such research are identified.

Background: For patients with advanced cancer, visits to the emergency department (ED) are common. Such patients present to the ED with a specific profile of palliative care needs, including burdensome symptoms such as pain, dyspnea, or vomiting that cannot be controlled in other settings and a lack of well-defined goals of care. The goals of this study are: i) to test the feasibility of recruiting, enrolling, and randomizing patients with serious illness in the ED; and ii) to evaluate the impact of ED-initiated palliative care on health care utilization, quality of life, and survival., Methods/design: This is a protocol for a single center parallel, two-arm randomized controlled trial in ED patients with metastatic solid tumors comparing ED-initiated palliative care referral to a control group receiving usual care. We plan to enroll 125 to 150 ED-advanced cancer patients at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York, USA, who meet the following criteria: i) pass a brief cognitive screen; ii) speak fluent English or Spanish; and iii) have never been seen by palliative care. We will use balanced block randomization in groups of 50 to assign patients to the intervention or control group after completion of a baseline questionnaire. All research staff performing assessment or analysis will be blinded to patient assignment. We will measure the impact of the palliative care intervention on the following outcomes: i) timing and rate of palliative care consultation; ii) quality of life and depression at 12 weeks, measured using the FACT-G and PHQ-9; iii) health care utilization; and iv) length of survival. The primary analysis will be based on intention-to-treat., Discussion: This pilot randomized controlled trial will test the feasibility of recruiting, enrolling, and randomizing patients with advanced cancer in the ED, and provide a preliminary estimate of the impact of palliative care referral on health care utilization, quality of life, and survival., Trial Registration: Clinical Trials.gov identifier: NCT01358110 (Entered 5/19/2011).