Search

Background: Predictive health services modeling signals a shortage of board-certified Hospice and Palliative Medicine (HPM) physicians. Methods: This article introduces the Community Hospice and Palliative Medicine (CHPM) Fellowship, an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Advancing Innovation in Residency Education (AIRE) project designed to enable mid-career physicians (at least five years out from residency or fellowship) to achieve eligibility for board certification in HPM. Results: From 2020 to 2023, 24 fellows have completed or are currently participating in the CHPM fellowship which is evaluated using the Kirkpatrick model. Conclusion: This program shows promise in addressing the impending HPM workforce shortage by allowing physicians to complete a fellowship in their local communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After-death research with next-of-kin can enhance our understanding of end-of-life care and translate into better services for dying persons and their survivors. This article describes ethical and methodological issues that emerged in a pilot of a face-to-face interview guide designed to elicit next-of-kin's perceptions of end-of-life care. The pilot study was part of a larger Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Services Research protocol to improve end-of-life care in VA Medical Centers. By deconstructing the research process from an ethical perspective and engaging in critical self-assessment, the authors aim to inform other researchers of potential problems involved in after-death research with next-of-kin.

Background. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of a multicomponent palliative care intervention on choice and use of opioid pain medications for symptom control for patients dying in an acute care inpatient setting. Methods. A preintervention/postintervention trial was conducted between 2001 and 2003. Participants were physician, nursing, and ancillary staff of inpatient services of an urban, tertiary care Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center. The intervention included staff education to better identify actively dying patients and a Comfort Care Order Set to guide care in the last hours of life. Data abstracted from computerized medical records of 191 veterans who died during a 6-month period before (N = 98) and after (N = 93) the intervention were used to examine changes in choice and amount of medication administered in the last 3 days of life. Results. Findings show a significant increase in orders specifically for morphine from 47.4% to 81.7% (p < .001). Orders for hydromorphone or oxycodone did not increase significantly, and no patients had orders for meperidine or codeine. There was an increase in the administration of opioids from 16.7% to 73.0% of patients (p < .001). The amount of opioid administered (in oral morphine equivalents) increased from 31.9 mg/72 hours preintervention to 52.9 mg/ 72 hours postintervention (p = .12). Conclusions. The results indicate that the availability of morphine as a preferred opioid and the number of patients who received opioid medication during the last 3 days of life increased after introduction of the inpatient palliative care program. Key Words: End-of-life care--Palliative care--Comfort care--Inpatient--Physician practice--Veterans.

After-death research with next-of-kin can enhance our understanding of end-of-life care and translate into better services for dying persons and their survivors. This article describes ethical and methodological issues that emerged in a pilot of a face-to-face interview guide designed to elicit next-of-kin's perceptions of end-of-life care. The pilot study was part of a larger Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Services Research protocol to improve end-of-life care in VA Medical Centers. By deconstructing the research process from an ethical perspective and engaging in critical self-assessment, the authors aim to inform other researchers of potential problems involved in after-death research with next-of-kin.

Abstract A series of papers in Philosophy, Ethics and Humanities in Medicine (PEHM) have recently disputed whether non-heart beating organ donors are alive and whether non-heart beating organ donation (NHBD) contravenes the dead donor rule. Several authors who argue that NHBD involves harvesting organs from live patients appeal to "strong irreversibility" (death beyond the reach of resuscitative efforts to restore life) as a necessary criterion that patients must meet before physicians can declare them to be dead. Sam Shemie, who defends our current practice of NHBD, holds that in fact physicians consider patients to be dead or not according to physician intention to resuscitate or not. We suggest that criteria for a concept are not necessarily truth conditions for assertions involving the concept. Hence, non-heart beating donors may be declared dead without meeting the criterion of strong irreversibility even though strong irreversibility is implied by the concept of death. Our perception that a concept applies in a given case is determined not by the concept itself but by our necessary skill and judgment when using it. In the case of deciding that a patient is dead, such judgment is learned by physicians as they learn the practice of medicine and may vary according to circumstances. Current practice of NHBD can therefore be defended without abandoning death as an empirical concept, as Shemie appears to do. We conclude that the dead donor rule continues to be viable and ought to be retained so as to guarantee what the public most cares about as regards organ donation: that physicians can be trusted to make determinations of eligibility for organ donation in the interests of patients and not for other purposes such as increasing the availability of organs.