Search

Purpose Many nursing home (NH) residents with dementia receive burdensome, aggressive treatments at the end of life (EOL). The Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatments (POLSTs) paradigm is a strategy to enhance EOL care. This article describes the history and features of the POLST paradigm, discusses the potential advantages of using this paradigm for NH residents with dementia, and briefly explores challenges that nurse practitioners (NPs) face in using the POLST for persons with dementia. Data sources Review of the literature. Conclusions Potential advantages associated with implementation of POLST in NH residents with dementia include increased communication and documentation about residents' EOL care preferences, increased concordance between care preferences documented in POLST forms and EOL care provided to residents, and lower rates of unwanted, burdensome treatments at EOL. POLST may also guide NPs in communicating EOL care options with residents and/or their surrogates. However, difficulty interpreting and explaining POLST care options, lack of understanding of POLST, limited discussions, and issues with surrogate authority and scope of practice are challenges that NPs may face in caring for NH residents with dementia. Implications for practice NPs should assess and optimize their knowledge and skills to conduct goals of care discussions, including POLST discussions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: For nursing home patients, hospice use and associated costs have grown dramatically. A better understanding of hospice in all care settings, especially how patients move across settings, is needed to inform debates about appropriateness of use and potential policy reform. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to describe characteristics and utilization of hospice among nursing home and non-nursing home patients. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Medicare, Medicaid and Minimum Data Set data, 1999-2008, were merged for 3,771 hospice patients aged 65 years and above from a safety net health system. Patients were classified into four groups who received hospice: 1) only in nursing homes; 2) outside of nursing homes; 3) crossover patients utilizing hospice in both settings; and 4) 'near-transition' patients who received hospice within 30 days of a nursing home stay. MAIN MEASURES: Differences in demographics, hospice diagnoses and length of stay, utilization and costs are presented with descriptive statistics. KEY RESULTS: Nursing home hospice patients were older, and more likely to be women and to have dementia ( p < 0.0001). Nearly one-third (32.3 %) of crossover patients had hospice stays > 6 months, compared with the other groups (16 % of nursing home hospice only, 10.7 % of non-nursing home hospice and 7.6 % of those with near transitions) ( p < 0.0001). Overall, 27.7 % of patients had a hospice stay <1 week, but there were marked differences between groups-48 % of near-transition patients vs. 7.4 % of crossover patients had these short hospice stays ( p < 0.0001). Crossover and near-transition hospice patients had higher costs to Medicare compared to other groups ( p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Dichotomizing hospice users only into nursing home vs. non-nursing home patients is difficult, due to transitions across settings. Hospice patients with transitions accrue higher costs. The impact of changes to the hospice benefit on patients who live or move through nursing homes near the end of life should be carefully considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: National POLST guidance indicates POLST is intended for individuals at risk of life-threatening clinical events due to serious illness. Even though this patient population includes many, but not all, nursing facility residents, there is evidence that POLST is used broadly in this setting. This study aimed to identify clinician perspectives regarding factors that influence their decision-making about whether to use POLST with nursing facility residents and to distinguish between inappropriate and appropriate use., Methods: We conducted a descriptive qualitative study to explore the experience of nursing facility clinicians using POLST with residents and deciding who is appropriate and inappropriate for POLST. Participants were purposively sampled from multiple states using POLST. Interviews were audio-recorded and professionally transcribed. We used rapid qualitative analysis to code data and identify themes., Results: We interviewed 28 clinicians from 14 states about how they decided whether to use POLST with nursing facility residents and to distinguish between inappropriate and appropriate use. Four themes emerged as factors driving clinician-decision-making POLST use: (1) belief that "everyone is appropriate"; (2) resident and family preferences; (3) resident health status; and (4) policies requiring POLST [Correction added after first online publication on 07 Feb 2024. The word "For" has been changed to "Four" in the previous sentence.]. In most cases, participants cited resident and family preferences for treatment limitations as well as prognosis and clinical assessments in determining when POLST use was appropriate. Factors influencing potentially inappropriate POLST use included nursing facility policies requiring POLST completion that preempted clinical judgments of appropriateness., Conclusions: Findings highlight the disconnect between National POLST guidance and current use of POLST in nursing facilities. Policies requiring POLST use in nursing facilities and the belief that "everyone is appropriate" may impede clinician autonomy and lead to potentially inappropriate POLST use. Given varying approaches to POLST use in nursing facilities, there is a need to refocus attention on the intended population for POLST., (© 2023 The Authors. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The American Geriatrics Society.)

Advance care planning (ACP) has been recognized as crucial by patients, families, and clinicians; however, different definitions and measurements have led to inconsistencies in practice and mixed evidence in the literature. This narrative review explores ACP's evolution, innovations, and outcomes using thematic analysis to synthesize data from randomized controlled trials, reviews, and editorials. Key findings include (1) ACP has evolved over the past several decades from a sole focus on code status and advance directive (AD) forms to a continuum of care planning over the life course focused on tailored preparation for patients and surrogate decision-makers and (2) ACP measurement has evolved from traditional outcome metrics, such as AD completion, to a comprehensive outcomes framework that includes behavior change theory, systems, implementation science, and a focus on surrogate outcomes. Since the recent development of an ACP consensus definition and outcomes framework, high-quality trials have reported mainly positive outcomes for interventions, especially for surrogates, which aligns with the patient desire to relieve decision-making burden for loved ones. Additionally, measurement of "clinically meaningful" ACP information, including documented goals of care discussions, is increasingly being integrated into electronic health records (EHR), and emerging, real-time assessments and natural language processing are enhancing ACP evaluation. To make things easier for patients, families, and care teams, clinicians and researchers can use and disseminate these evolved definitions; provide patients validated, easy-to-use tools that prime patients for conversations and decrease health disparities; use easy-to-access clinician training and simple scripts for interdisciplinary team members; and document patients' values and preferences in the medical record to capture clinically meaningful ACP so this information is available at the point of care. Future efforts should focus on efficient implementation, expanded reimbursement options, and seamless integration of EHR documentation to ensure ACP's continued evolution to better serve patients and their care partners., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

There is widespread agreement that clinicians should talk to seriously ill patients and their families about their illnesses. However, advance directives as a quality metric have been called into question because of the lack of data that these conversations lead to goal-concordant care. The controversy has led many to reexamine the purpose of conversations with seriously ill patients and what should be discussed in ambulatory visits.  In this Controversies in Palliative care, experts in palliative care review the literature and suggest both how it influences their clinical practice and what research needs to be done to clarify the controversy. While there is not a single outcome that the experts agree on, they posit a variety of different ways to assess these conversations., (Copyright © 2023 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Advance Care Planning (ACP) in the US is complex due in part to a lack of a unified health care system, though more recent policy changes permitting reimbursement for ACP conversations offer some hope. One key barrier to ACP is public perceptions of ACP, made worse by a historical focus on messaging that is unappealing and does not meet people's need to focus on the present before contemplating the future. As we learn more about how to engage the public, there is also increasing recognition that the previous focus on making very specific decisions about the future needs to shift to a focus on preparing people for communication and decision making. Numerous programs exist for health care professionals to support meaningful explorations of goals, values, and preferences, and there is growing availability of resources to support this work, both in the community and health care setting. Further research is needed to understand the full complexity of ACP implementation and to identify person-centred outcomes to support high quality ACP., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier GmbH.)

Background: Life-sustaining treatment (LST) orders are important communication tools used to ensure preference-concordant care at the end of life. Recent studies reveal concerning rates of discordance between current preferences and documented LST orders, especially in nursing facilities without POLST. Reasons for discordance in facilities using POLST have been explored, however the majority of nursing facilities in the United States do not yet use the POLST form., Design: Qualitative descriptive study using constant comparative analysis., Setting: Nursing facilities in Indiana ( n = 6) not using POLST., Participants: Residents ( n = 15) and surrogate decision-makers of residents without decisional capacity (n = 15) with discordance between current preferences and documented LST orders., Measurements: Do not resuscitate, do not hospitalize (DNH), and do not intubate (DNI) orders were extracted from medical charts. Current preferences were elicited using the Respecting Choices Advanced Steps model. A semi-structured interview guide was used to explore reasons for discordance between current preferences and LST orders., Results: Reasons for discordance included: (1) inadequate information about the range of available LST options, what each involves, and how to formally communicate preferences; (2) no previous discussion with facility staff; (3) no documentation of previously expressed preferences; and (4) family involvement., Conclusion: Reasons for discordance between expressed preferences and LST orders suggest that in facilities without a uniform and systematic LST order documentation strategy like POLST, these conversations may not occur and/or be documented. Staff should be aware that residents and surrogates may have preferences about LSTs that require strategic solicitation and documentation.

Background: Understanding factors associated with risk of pain allows residents and clinicians to plan care and set priorities, however, factors associated with pain in nursing home residents has not been conclusively studied., Aim: To evaluate the association between pain and nursing home (NH) resident demographic and clinical characteristics., Design: Retrospective analysis of Minimum Data Set 3.0 records of nursing home residents residing in 44 Indiana NHs between September 27, 2011 and December 27, 2019 (N = 9,060)., Results: Pain prevalence in this sample of NH residents was 23.7%. Of those with pain, 28.0% experienced moderate to severe/frequent pain and 54.6% experienced persistent pain. Risk factors for moderate to severe/frequent pain include female sex; living in a rural setting; intact, mildly, or moderately impaired cognition; arthritis; contracture; anxiety; and depression. In contrast, stroke and Alzheimer's disease and Alzheimer's-disease related dementias (AD/ADRD) were associated with decreased risk of reporting moderate to severe/frequent pain, likely representing both the under-assessment and under-reporting of pain among cognitively impaired NH residents. Risk factors for persistent pain included age <70, Black race, living in a rural location, intact cognition, contracture, and depression., Conclusions: Pain remains a pressing problem for NH residents. In this study, we identified demographic and clinical factors associated with moderate to severe frequent pain and persistent pain. Residents with a diagnosis of AD/ADRD were less likely to report pain, likely representing the difficulty of evaluating pain in these residents. It is important to note that those with cognitive impairment may not experience any less pain, but assessment and reporting difficulties may make them appear to have less pain. Knowledge of factors associated with pain for NH residents has the potential for improving the ability to predict, prevent, and provide better pain care in NH residents., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Disclosures/conflicts of interest: Connie S. Cole: no conflicts of interest Janet S. Carpenter: University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, relationship now ended; Simumetrix, relationship now ended; Mapi Research Trust, relationship ongoing. Justin Blackburn: no conflicts of interest Chen X. Chen: no conflicts of interest Susan E. Hickman: no conflicts of interest, (Copyright © 2023 American Society for Pain Management Nursing. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: POLST orders are actionable in an emergency, so it is important that the decisions be of high quality and concordant with current preferences. The goal of this study is to determine the relationship between concordance and decision quality outcomes, including decision satisfaction and decisional conflict, among nursing facility residents and surrogates who recall POLST., Methods: We completed structured interviews in 29 nursing facilities with 275 participants who had previously signed a POLST form. This included residents who were still making their own medical decisions (n = 123) and surrogate decision-makers for residents without decisional capacity (n = 152). POLST recall was defined as remembering talking about and/or completing the POLST form previously signed by the participant. Concordance was determined by comparing preferences elicited during a standardized interview with the POLST form on file. Decisional conflict, decision satisfaction, and conversation quality were assessed with standardized tools., Results: Half of participants (50%) remembered talking about or completing the POLST form, but recall was not associated with the length of time since POLST completion or concordance with existing preferences. In multivariable analyses, there was no association between POLST recall, concordance, and decision quality outcomes, though satisfaction was associated with conversation quality., Conclusions: Half of the residents and surrogates in this study recalled the POLST they previously signed. Neither the age of the form nor the ability to recall the POLST conversation should be considered indicators of whether existing POLST orders match current preferences. Findings confirm a relationship between POLST conversation quality and satisfaction, underscoring the importance of POLST completion as a communication process., (© 2023 The Authors. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The American Geriatrics Society.)

Background/aims: A significant number of people with Alzheimer's disease or related dementia diagnoses will be cared for in nursing homes near the end of life. Advance care planning (ACP), the process of eliciting and documenting patient-centered preferences for care, is considered essential to providing high quality care for this population. Nursing homes are currently required by regulations to offer ACP to residents and families, but no training requirements exist for nursing home staff, and approaches to fulfilling this regulatory and ethical responsibility vary. As a result, residents may receive care inconsistent with their goals, such as unwanted hospitalizations. Pragmatic trials offer a way to develop and test ACP in real-world settings to increase the likelihood of adoption of sustainable best practices., Methods: The "Aligning Patient Preferences-a Role Offering Alzheimer's patients, Caregivers, and Healthcare Providers Education and Support (APPROACHES)" project is designed to pragmatically test and evaluate a staff-led program in 137 nursing homes (68 = intervention, 69 = control) owned by two nursing home corporations. Existing nursing home staff receive standardized training and implement the ACP Specialist program under the supervision of a corporate lead. The primary trial outcome is the annual rate of hospital transfers (admissions and emergency department visits). Consistent with the spirit of a pragmatic trial, study outcomes rely on data already collected for quality improvement, clinical, or billing purposes. Configurational analysis will also be performed to identify conditions associated with implementation., Results: Partnerships with large corporate companies enable the APPROACHES trial to rely on corporate infrastructure to roll out the intervention, with support for a corporate implementation lead who is charged with the initial introduction and ongoing support for nursing home-based ACP Specialists. These internal champions connect the project with other company priorities and use strategies familiar to nursing home leaders for the initiation of other programs. Standardized data collection across nursing homes also supports the conduct of pragmatic trials in this setting., Discussion: Many interventions to improve care in nursing homes have failed to demonstrate an impact or, if successful, maintain an impact over time. Pragmatic trials, designed to test interventions in real-world contexts that are evaluated through existing data sources collected routinely as part of clinical care, are well suited for the nursing home environment. A robust program that increases access to ACP for nursing home residents has the potential to increase goal-concordant care and is expected to reduce hospital transfers. If successful, the ACP Specialist Program will be primed for rapid translation into nursing home practice to reduce unwanted, burdensome hospitalizations and improve the quality of care for residents with dementia.

Advance care planning (ACP) is an important component of person-centered care for older adults in nursing facilities. Although nursing facilities have a statutory obligation to offer ACP to residents, there are no minimum training requirements for staff. Lack of consistent ACP training contributes to significant variability in ACP conversation quality, inaccurate or incomplete documentation of preferences, and infrequent re-evaluation of prior decisions. Indiana added ACP training for nursing facility staff to the Value-Based Purchasing formula for 2019. Facilities received 5 points (of a 100-point total formula) if at least one staff member completed the designated ACP training during the year. ACP Foundations Training was developed by faculty at Indiana University and made available to all Indiana nursing facilities. A total of 1,087 participants, representing 94.2% (501 of 532) Indiana nursing facilities, completed the training. Approximately every participant (99.4%) agreed that the training had practical value. This academic-government partnership was successful in providing basic information about ACP to staff at most nursing facilities across Indiana and offers a model for states to provide critical educational content to nursing facility staff by incentivizing training. [ Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 48 (2), 31-35.].

POLST (Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment) is a medical order form used to document preferences about cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), medical interventions such as hospitalization, care in the intensive care unit, and/or ventilation, as well as artificial nutrition. Programs based on the POLST paradigm are used in virtually every state under names that include POST (Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment), MOLST (Medical Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment), and MOST (Medical Orders for Scope of Treatment), and these forms are used in the care of hundreds of thousands of geriatric patients every year. Although POLST is intended for persons who are at risk of a life-threatening clinical event due to a serious life-limiting medical condition, some nursing homes and residential care settings use POLST to document CPR preferences for all residents, resulting in potentially inappropriate use with patients who are ineligible because they are too healthy. This article focuses on reasons that POLST is used as a default code status order form, the risks associated with this practice, and recommendations for nursing homes to implement appropriate use of POLST., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The reasons for discordance between advance care planning (ACP) documentation and current preferences are not well understood. The POLST form offers a unique opportunity to learn about the reasons for discordance and concordance that has relevance for POLST as well as ACP generally., Design: Qualitative descriptive including constant comparative analysis within and across cases., Setting: Twenty-six nursing facilities in Indiana., Participants: Residents (n = 36) and surrogate decision-makers of residents without decisional capacity (n = 37)., Measurements: A semi-structured interview guide was used to explore the reasons for discordance or concordance between current preferences and existing POLST forms., Findings: Reasons for discordance include: (1) problematic nursing facility practices related to POLST completion; (2) missing key information about POLST treatment decisions; (3) deferring to others; and (4) changes over time. Some participants were unable to explain the discordance due to a lack of insight or inability to remember details of the original POLST conversation. Explanations for concordance include: (1) no change in the resident's medical condition and/or the resident is unlikely to improve; (2) use of the substituted judgment standard for surrogate decision-making; and (3) fixed opinion about what is "right" with little to no insight., Conclusion: Participant explanations for discordance between existing POLST orders and current preferences highlight the importance of adequate structures and processes to support high quality ACP in nursing facilities. Residents with stable or poor health may be more appropriate candidates for POLST than residents with a less clear prognosis, though preferences should be revisited periodically as well as when there is a change in condition to help ensure existing documentation is concordant with current treatment preferences., (© 2021 The American Geriatrics Society.)

Background: POLST is widely used to document the treatment preferences of nursing facility residents as orders, but it is unknown how well previously completed POLST orders reflect current preferences (concordance) and what factors are associated with concordance., Objectives: To describe POLST preference concordance and identify factors associated with concordance., Design: Chart reviews to document existing POLST orders and interviews to elicit current treatment preferences., Setting: POLST-using nursing facilities (n = 29) in Indiana., Participants: Nursing facility residents (n = 123) and surrogates of residents without decisional capacity (n = 152)., Measurements: Concordance was determined by comparing existing POLST orders for resuscitation, medical interventions, and artificial nutrition with current treatment preferences. Comfort-focused POLSTs contained orders for do not resuscitate, comfort measures, and no artificial nutrition., Results: Overall, 55.7% (123/221) of residents and 44.7% (152/340) of surrogates participated (total n = 275). POLST concordance was 44%, but concordance was higher for comfort-focused POLSTs (68%) than for non-comfort-focused POLSTs (27%) (p < 0.001). In the unadjusted analysis, increasing resident age (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.07, p < 0.01), better cognitive functioning (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02-1.13, p < 0.01), surrogate as the decision-maker (OR 2.87, OR 1.73-4.75, p < 0.001), and comfort-focused POLSTs (OR 6.01, 95% CI 3.29-11.00, p < 0.01) were associated with concordance. In the adjusted multivariable model, only having an existing comfort-focused POLST was associated with higher odds of POLST concordance (OR 5.28, 95% CI 2.59-10.73, p < 0.01)., Conclusions: Less than half of all POLST forms were concordant with current preferences, but POLST was over five times as likely to be concordant when orders reflected preferences for comfort-focused care. Findings suggest a clear need to improve the quality of POLST use in nursing facilities and focus its use among residents with stable, comfort-focused preferences., (© 2021 The American Geriatrics Society.)

Background: It is essential to high-quality medical care that life-sustaining treatment orders match the current, values-based preferences of patients or their surrogate decision-makers. It is unknown whether concordance between orders and current preferences is higher when a POLST form is used compared to standard documentation practices., Objective: To assess concordance between existing orders and current preferences for nursing facility residents with and without POLST forms., Design: Chart review and interviews., Setting: Forty Indiana nursing facilities (29 where POLST is used and 11 where POLST is not in use)., Participants: One hundred sixty-one residents able to provide consent and 197 surrogate decision-makers of incapacitated residents with and without POLST forms., Main Measurements: Concordance was measured by comparing life-sustaining treatment orders in the medical record (e.g., orders about resuscitation, intubation, and hospitalization) with current preferences. Concordance was analyzed using population-averaged binary logistic regression. Inverse probability weighting techniques were used to account for non-response. We hypothesized that concordance would be higher in residents with POLST (n = 275) in comparison to residents without POLST (n = 83)., Key Results: Concordance was higher for residents with POLST than without POLST (59.3% versus 34.9%). In a model adjusted for resident, surrogate, and facility characteristics, the odds were 3.05 times higher that residents with POLST had orders for life-sustaining treatment match current preferences in comparison to residents without POLST (OR 3.05 95% CI 1.67-5.58, p < 0.001). No other variables were significantly associated with concordance., Conclusions: Nursing facility residents with POLST are significantly more likely than residents without POLST to have concordance between orders in their medical records and current preferences for life-sustaining treatments, increasing the likelihood that their treatment preferences will be known and honored. However, findings indicate further systems change and clinical training are needed to improve POLST concordance.

There is a growing recognition of significant, unmet palliative care needs in nursing facilities, yet limitations in the workforce limit access to palliative care services. Attention to palliation is particularly important when there are efforts to reduce hospitalizations to help ensure there are no unintended harms associated with treating residents in place. A specialized palliative care registered nurse (PCRN) role was developed as part of the OPTIMISTIC (Optimizing Patient Transfers, Impacting Medical quality, and Improving Symptoms: Transforming Institutional Care) program, a federally funded project to reduce potentially avoidable hospitalizations. Working in collaboration with existing clinical staff and medical providers, the PCRN focuses on managing symptoms, advance care planning, achieving goal concordant care, and promoting quality of life. The PCRN serves as a resource for families through education and support. The PCRN also provides education and mentorship to staff to increase their comfort, knowledge, and skills with end-of-life care. The goals of this article are to provide an overview of the PCRN role and its implementation in nursing facilities and describe core functions that are transferrable to other contexts.

Objectives: To assess the use of the Indiana Physician Orders for Scope of Treatment (POST) form to record nursing home (NH) resident treatment preferences and associated practices., Design: Survey., Setting: Indiana NHs., Participants: Staff responsible for advance care planning in 535 NHs., Measurements: Survey about use of the Indiana POST, related policies, and educational activities., Methods: NHs were contacted by telephone or email. Nonresponders were sent a brief postcard survey., Results: Ninety-one percent (n=486) of Indiana NHs participated, and 79% had experience with POST. Of the 65% of NHs that complete POST with residents, 46% reported that half or more residents had a POST form. POST was most often completed at the time of admission (68%). Only 52% of participants were aware of an existing facility policy regarding use of POST; 80% reported general staff education on POST. In the 172 NHs not using POST, reasons for not using it included unfamiliarity with the tool (23%) and lack of facility policies (21%)., Conclusion: Almost 3 years after a grassroots campaign to introduce the voluntary Indiana POST program, a majority of NHs were using POST to support resident care. Areas for improvement include creating policies on POST for all NHs, training staff on POST conversations, and considering processes that may enhance the POST conversation, such as finding an optimal time to engage in conversations about treatment preferences other than a potentially rushed admission process., (© 2018, Copyright the Authors Journal compilation © 2018, The American Geriatrics Society.)

Background and Purpose: Little is known about surrogates' experiences of engaging in Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) discussions. This study describes family surrogates' experiences when engaging in POLST discussions with primary care providers., Methods: Semistructured interviews were conducted with 10 family surrogates of individuals with advanced dementia who were enrolled in a Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly or resided in a nursing home. Interviews were analyzed using directed content analysis based on the conceptual model of communication and surrogate decision making by Torke et al. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION:: Surrogates reported that clear explanations of clinical information and the opportunity to ask questions and reiterate what they heard were helpful in making treatment decisions. Moreover, surrogates reported feeling respected and understood when providers expressed concern for them or their family member with advanced dementia and asked them about their emotional responses to decision making. Although nine surrogates reported very positive communication with providers, one surrogate expressed discomfort with the interaction and described feeling pressured to make health care decisions., Implications for Practice: With effective communication, family surrogates feel emotionally supported during communication and decision-making processes. Providers are encouraged to focus on developing expert communication skills for end-of-life care discussions.

Importance: Poor communication by health care professionals contributes to physical and psychological suffering in patients living with serious illness. Patients may not fully understand their illness, prognosis, and treatment options or may not receive medical care consistent with their goals. Despite considerable research exploring the role of communication in this setting, many questions remain, and a clear agenda for communication research is lacking., Observations: Through a consensus conference and subsequent activities, we reviewed the state of the science, identified key evidence gaps in understanding the impact of communication on patient outcomes, and created an agenda for future research. We considered 7 broad topics: shared decision making, advance care planning, communication training, measuring communication, communication about prognosis, emotion and serious illness communication, and cultural issues. We identified 5 areas in which further research could substantially move the field forward and help enhance patient care: measurement and methodology, including how to determine communication quality; mechanisms of communication, such as identifying the specific clinician behaviors that patients experience as both honest and compassionate, or the role of bias in the clinical encounter; alternative approaches to advance care planning that focus on the quality of serious illness communication and not simply completion of forms; teaching and disseminating communication skills; and approaches, such as economic incentives and other clinician motivators, to change communication behavior., Conclusions: Our findings highlight the urgent need to improve quality of communication between health care professionals and patients living with serious illness through a broad range of research that covers communication skills, tools, patient education, and models of care.

Nurses who care for older patients are exposed to significant suffering and loss that can lead to the development of compassion fatigue and burnout. An exploratory descriptive study was conducted to assess compassion fatigue, burnout, and compassion satisfaction in a group of 42 nurses who worked on a geriatric medicine unit using the Professional Quality of Life (ProQOL) compassion satisfaction and compassion fatigue 5 scale. Nurses reported average levels of compassion fatigue, burnout, and compassion satisfaction. However, new nurses reported higher levels of compassion fatigue (p < .01) and burnout (p = .02) than experienced nurses. Findings suggest the need to purposely build a supportive environment that focuses on new nurses to reduce compassion fatigue and burnout while enhancing compassion satisfaction., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) forms are used to document patient treatment preferences as medical orders. Prior research demonstrates that use of POLST alters medical treatments in a way that is consistent with the POLST orders. However, there are minimal data about the quality of POLST decisions, including whether they reflect the current preferences of well-informed patients., Objective: Evaluate the quality of POLST decisions., Design: Chart abstraction; interviews., Subjects: Nursing home residents and healthcare agents of incapacitated nursing home residents (n = 28)., Measurements: Characteristics of the POLST conversation were assessed. Brief vignettes were used to assess knowledge about how POLST orders guide medical treatment. Current treatment preferences were elicited and compared with the patient's POLST orders to assess discordance., Results: A majority (59%) of participants recognized the POLST form. Participants were generally accurate in their knowledge of how POLST orders guide treatment concerning cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) (68%), antibiotics (74%), and artificial nutrition (79%), but less so for medical interventions (50%). Current treatment preferences were initially discordant with one or more POLST orders for 64% (18/28) of participants, but half of these discordances were resolved with further discussion (e.g., participant agreed with the existing order). Discordance by treatment decision was as follows: CPR (7%), level of medical intervention (18%), antibiotics (21%), and artificial nutrition (11%)., Conclusions: Discordance between current preferences and POLST orders is complex. Interventions are needed to support high-quality POLST decisions that are informed and concordant with current preferences.