Search

Background: The number of advanced heart failure patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) is increasing. Despite guideline-recommendations, little is known about specialist palliative care involvement in LVAD-patients, especially in Europe. This study aims to investigate timing and setting of specialist palliative care in LVAD-patients., Methods: We conducted a retrospective multicenter study in 2022. Specialist palliative care services in German LVAD-centers were identified and invited to participate. Forty adult LVAD-patients (mean age 65 years (SD 7.9), 90% male) from seven centers that received a specialist palliative care consultation during hospitalization were included., Results: In 37 (67.3%) of the 55 LVAD-centers, specialist palliative care was available. The median duration between LVAD-implantation and first specialist palliative care contact was 17 months (IQR 6.3-50.3 months). Median duration between consultation and death was seven days (IQR 3-28 days). 65% of consults took place in an intensive/intermediate care unit with half of the patients having a Do-Not-Resuscitate order. Care planning significantly increased during involvement (advance directives before: n = 15, after: n = 19, p < 0.001; DNR before: n = 20, after: n = 28, p < 0.001). Symptom burden as assessed at first specialist palliative care contact was higher compared to the consultation requests (request: median 3 symptoms (IQR 3-6); first contact: median 9 (IQR 6-10); p < 0.001) with a focus on weakness, anxiety, overburdening of next-of-kin and dyspnea. More than 70% of patients died during index hospitalization, one third of these in a palliative care unit., Conclusions: This largest European multicenter investigation of LVAD-patients receiving specialist palliative care shows a late integration and high physical and psychosocial symptom burden. This study highlights the urgent need for earlier integration to identify and address poorly controlled symptoms. Further studies and educational efforts are needed to close the gap between guideline-recommendations and the current status quo., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: In the research network of German university palliative care centers (PallPan), as part of Network University Medicine (NUM), recommendations for action were developed in regard to the care provided for seriously ill and dying patients during a pandemic. For this purpose, the experiences and needs of hospital staff working closely with patients outside of specialized palliative care units during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic were also examined., Materials and Methods: Nationwide online survey of 8,882 physicians, nurses and therapists working in acute inpatient care in the period from December 2020 to January 2021 by means of a newly developed and piloted questionnaire on changes, burdens and cooperation with specialized palliative care. Grouping based on the changes in the number of seriously ill and dying people in the first wave of the pandemic. Due to the exploratory character of the survey, the data were analyzed descriptively., Results: 505/8882 completed questionnaires were evaluated (5.7 %). 167/505 (33.1 %) of the respondents reported a lower quality of care for the critically ill and dying. 464/505 (91.8 %) reported exemptions in place for visiting the dying. The most frequently mentioned stress factor was the perceived loneliness of the seriously ill and dying 437/505 (86.5 %), followed by stricter hygiene rules 409/505 (81 %), increased workload 372/505 (73.3 %) and perceived psychological stress on relatives and survivors 395/505 (78.2 %). 141/505 (27.9 %) of respondents used Tablet PCs to support patient-family communication. 310/505 (61.4 %) involved palliative care professionals in patient care, and 356/505 (70.5 %) of respondents found other palliative care services helpful., Conclusion: Experiences and suggestions for improving palliative care in pandemic times are integrated into the PallPan recommendations for action. Family visits should be allowed and supplemented by digital offers. Palliative Care should also be integrated into both pandemic and contingency plans., Competing Interests: Die Autorinnen/Autoren geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht., (The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).)

Background: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has presented major challenges to the health system. Despite high acute case numbers, patients without Covid-19 still need to be cared for. Due to the severity of the disease and a possible stressful overall situation, patients with palliative care needs also require comprehensive care during pandemic times. In addition to specialized palliative care facilities, this also takes place in non palliative care wards. In order to ensure this general palliative care also in pandemic times, the experience of the staff should be used. The aim of this paper is to examine challenges and possible solutions for general palliative care inpatients in relation to the care of seriously ill and dying patients and their relatives., Methods: Qualitative semi-structured focus groups were conducted online for the study. Participants were staff from intensive care or isolation wards or from units where vulnerable patients (e.g. with cognitive impairment) are cared for. The focus groups were recorded and subsequently transcribed. The data material was analysed with the content structuring content analysis according to Kuckartz., Results: Five focus groups with four to eight health care professionals with various backgrounds were conducted. Fifteen main categories with two to eight subcategories were identified. Based on frequency and the importance expressed by the focus groups, six categories were extracted as central aspects: visiting regulations, communication with relatives, hygiene measures, cooperation, determination of the patients will and the possibility to say good bye., Conclusion: The pandemic situation produced several challenges needing specific solutions in order to manage the care of seriously ill and dying patients. Especially visiting needs regulation to prevent social isolation and dying alone. Finding alternative communication ways as well as interprofessional and interdisciplinary cooperation is a precondition for individualised care of seriously ill and dying patients and their relatives. Measures preventing infections should be transparently communicated in hospitals., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the suitability and comprehensibility of the integrated palliative care outcome scale for the evaluation of palliative care needs in patients with heart failure., Methods and Results: This cross-sectional study investigated 100 heart failure patients (40 women, 60 men; median age 79 years) within the first few days of their hospitalisation by applying the integrated palliative care outcome scale (3-day recall period) and two additional self-developed questions about the suitability and comprehensibility of the integrated palliative care outcome scale. Clinically relevant somatic and psycho-emotional symptoms were reported very frequently (approximately 75% each), followed by communicational needs or practical issues. Ninety-five per cent of patients thought the integrated palliative care outcome scale very easy to understand, and 91% judged the integrated palliative care outcome scale suitable to assess palliative care needs., Conclusion: The integrated palliative care outcome scale was well accepted by hospitalised patients with heart failure and identified a high burden of both physical and psycho-emotional symptoms. Screening for palliative care has to consider patients and their relatives alike, and should be part of a comprehensive care concept jointly integrated into clinical routine by primary and specialised palliative care teams.

In the partnership between the medical departments of Würzburg University, Germany, and Nagasaki University, Japan, palliative care is a relevant topic. The aim of the study was to perform a comparative analysis of the hospital-based palliative care teams in Würzburg (PCT-W) and Nagasaki (PCT-N). Survey of staff composition and retrospective analysis of PCT patient charts in both PCTs were conducted. Patients self-assessed their symptoms in PCT-W and in Radiation Oncology Würzburg (RO-W). The (negative) quality indicator 'percentage of deceased hospitalised patients with PCT contact for less than 3 days before death' (Earle in Int J Qual Health Care 17(6):505-509, 2005) was analysed. Both PCTs follow a multidisciplinary team approach. PCT-N saw 410 cancer patients versus 853 patients for PCT-W (22.8% non-cancer patients). The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status at first contact with PCT-N was 3 or 4 in 39.3% of patients versus 79.0% for PCT-W. PCT-N was engaged in co-management longer than PCT-W (mean 20.7 days, range 1-102 versus mean 4.9 days, range 1-48). The most frequent patient-reported psychological symptom was anxiety (family anxiety: 98.3% PCT-W and 88.7% RO-W, anxiety 97.9% PCT-W and 85.9% RO-W), followed by depression (98.2% PCT-W and 80.3% RO-W). In 14 of the 148 deceased patients, PCT-N contact was initiated less than 3 days before death (9.4%) versus 121 of the 729 deceased PCT-W patients (16.6%). Psychological needs are highly relevant in both Germany and Japan, with more than 85% anxiety and depression in patients in the Japanese IPOS validation study (Sakurai in Jpn J Clin Oncol 49(3):257-262, 2019). This should be taken into account when implementing PCTs.

Background: New therapeutic modalities enable good treatment options for patients with advanced and metastatic head and neck cancer. In this context, discussions about the end of life, advance care planning, and palliative concepts are often eclipsed., Objective: Analysis of symptom burden and advance directives of palliatively comanaged inpatients using a palliative care self-assessment questionnaire. Based on the Earle quality indicator (QI), the integration of specialized palliative care in deceased inpatients was examined., Patients and Methods: Retrospective analysis of head and neck cancer patients cotreated by the palliative care service. Patients were surveyed using the Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale (IPOS) questionnaire., Results: The most frequent physical symptoms were weakness (77%), loss of appetite (65%), and poor mobility (65%). Pain was reported by 41% of patients. The most frequent emotional and psychosocial burdens were depression (97%) and worries about illness or treatment (94%), lack of ability to share feelings (77%), lack of information (85%), and organizational problems (77%). In 23% of patients, advanced directives were available. The Earle QI was not achieved., Discussion: Patients report a high degree of symptoms and stress, most often in emotional areas and in terms of communicative and practical needs. This may reflect a need to talk about wishes and expectations concerning the end of life. Palliative care services should aim to address psychosocial needs in particular.