Search

Background: While the importance of pediatric palliative care (PPC) for children with life-threatening illness is increasingly recognized, little is known about physicians' attitudes toward palliative care for children with heart disease. Objective: To compare the perspectives of PPC physicians and pediatric cardiologists regarding palliative care in pediatric heart disease. Design: Cross-sectional web-based surveys. Results: Responses from 183 pediatric cardiologists were compared to those of 49 PPC physicians (response rates 31% [183/589] and 28% [49/175], respectively). Forty-eight percent of PPC physicians and 63% of pediatric cardiologists agreed that availability of PPC is adequate (p = 0.028). The majority of both groups indicated that PPC consultation occurs “too late.” Compared with pediatric cardiologists, PPC physicians reported greater competence in all areas of advance care planning, communication, and symptom management. PPC physicians more often described obstacles to PPC consultation as “many” or “numerous” (42% vs. 7%, p < 0.001). PPC physicians overestimated how much pediatric cardiologists worry about PPC introducing inconsistency in approach (60% vs. 11%, p < 0.001), perceive lack of added value from PPC (30% vs. 7%, p < 0.001), believe that PPC involvement will undermine parental hope (65% vs. 44%, p = 0.003), and perceive that PPC is poorly accepted by parents (53% vs. 27%, p < 0.001). Conclusions: There are significant differences between pediatric cardiologists and PPC physicians in perception of palliative care involvement and perceived barriers to PPC consultation. An intervention that targets communication and exchange of expertise between PPC and pediatric cardiology could improve care for children with heart disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Although access to subspecialty pediatric palliative care (PPC) is increasing, little is known about the role of PPC for children with advanced heart disease (AHD).Objectives: The objective of this study was to examine features of subspecialty PPC involvement for children with AHD.Methods: This is a retrospective single-institution medical record review of patients with a primary diagnosis of AHD for whom the PPC team was initially consulted between 2011 and 2016.Results: Among 201 patients, 87% had congenital/structural heart disease, the remainder having acquired/nonstructural heart disease. Median age at initial PPC consultation was 7.7 months (range 1 day-28.8 years). Of the 92 patients who were alive at data collection, 73% had received initial consultation over one year before. Most common indications for consultation were goals of care (80%) and psychosocial support (54%). At initial consultation, most families (67%) expressed that their primary goal was for their child to live as long and as comfortably as possible. Among deceased patients (n = 109), median time from initial consultation to death was 33 days (range 1 day-3.6 years), and children whose families expressed that their primary goal was for their child to live as comfortably as possible were less likely to die in the intensive care unit (P = 0.03) and more likely to die in the setting of comfort care or withdrawal of life-sustaining interventions (P = 0.008).Conclusion: PPC involvement for children with AHD focuses on goals of care and psychosocial support. Findings suggest that PPC involvement at end of life supports goal-concordant care. Further research is needed to clarify the impact of PPC on patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Studies have shown that pediatricians in all stages of training are uncomfortable managing patients at end of life. Our goal was to create and test a portable reference card to improve pediatric resident education in comprehensive care for children nearing end of life. Methods: We evaluated the impact of the Pediatric End-of-Life Care Management Reference Card on residents' perceived comfort and knowledge through pre- and post-intervention surveys. The preintervention questionnaires and pocket cards were distributed to all first- and second-year residents, and then a follow-up survey was provided six months later. Based on Likert scales, questions focused on self-reported understanding of palliative care principles and knowledge regarding and comfort in performing end-of-life symptom management. Results: Twenty-six pediatric residents completed pre- and post-intervention surveys. Following receipt of the reference card, no significant changes were noted consistently across all groups of residents. The majority of improvements were noted when comparing second to third year residents, including knowledge and comfort related to pain management, comfort in managing secretions and nausea, and documentation following death. The first to second year residents demonstrated improvement in knowing what language to use to tell a family that their child has died. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that a portable reference card may be a convenient, simple, and useful component of education for pediatric residents in end-of-life care management. This reference card is a foundation from which to develop a standardized educational tool. Additional research is required to assess the impact of this type of intervention in pediatric palliative care education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]