Developing Priorities for Palliative Care Research in Advanced Liver Disease: A Multidisciplinary Approach

Palliative care and end stage liver disease: A survey study comparing perspectives of hepatology and palliative care physicians and clinical scenarios that could require palliative care intervention

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The prevalence and mortality of chronic liver disease has risen significantly. In end stage liver disease (ESLD) the survival of patients is approximately 2 years. Despite the poor prognosis and high symptom burden of these patients, integration of palliative care is reduced. We aim to analyze the agreement between palliative care and hepatology physicians of clinical scenarios that could require palliative care intervention.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted. Palliative care and hepatology physicians were surveyed. Using a five-point Likert scale, their perceptions of palliative care in ESLD were rated. Their agreement in clinical scenarios that could require palliative care intervention were evaluated. Analyses were conducted to assess any differences by primary role (hepatology vs. palliative care) and length of practice (<10 years vs. 10 years).

RESULTS

A total of 123 responses were obtained: 52% from palliative care and 48% from hepatology. The majority (66.7%) work in the field for up to ten years. There was a great consensus in 4 of the 8 clinical scenarios. In scenarios with less consensus, the area of activity and length of practice influence the reliance of physicians on palliative care. Involvement of palliative care in ESLD was considered "rare" by 30% and 61% consider difficult to predict the prognosis. More than 90% support medical training in both areas of activity.

CONCLUSION

The current involvement of palliative care is considered low, but there are clinical conditions that reveal a clear consensus and there's a unanimous view of the relevance of training.

Palliative care and end stage liver disease: A cohort analysis of palliative care use and factors associated with referral

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Prevalence and mortality of chronic liver disease have risen significantly. In end stage liver disease, the survival of patients is approximately two years. Despite the poor prognosis and high symptom burden of these patients, integration of palliative care is limited. We aim to assess associated factors and trends in palliative care use in recent years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A Multicenter retrospective cohort of patients with end stage liver disease who suffered in-hospital mortality between 2017 and 2019. Information regarding patient demographics, hospital characteristics, comorbidities, etiology, decompensations, and interventions was collected. Two-sided tests and logistic regression analysis were used to identify factors associated with palliative care use.

RESULTS

A total of 201 patients were analyzed, with a yearly increase in palliative care consultation: 26.7 % in 2017 to 38.3 % in 2019. Patients in palliative care were older (65.72 ± 11.70 vs. 62.10 ± 11.44; p = 0.003), had a lower Karnofsky functionality scale (χ=18.104; p = 0.000) and had higher rates of hepatic encephalopathy (32.1 % vs. 17.4 %, p = 0.007) and hepatocarcinoma (61.7 % vs. 26.2 %; p = 0.000). No differences were found for Model for End-stage Liver Disease (19.28 ± 6.60 vs. 19,90 ± 5.78; p = 0.507) or Child-Pugh scores (p = 0.739). None of the patients who die in the intensive care unit receive palliative care (0 % vs 31.6 %; p = 0.000). Half of the palliative care consultations occurred 6,5 days before death.

CONCLUSIONS

Palliative care use differs based on demographics, disease complications, and severity. Despite its increasing implementation, palliative care intervention occurs late. Future investigations should identify approaches to achieve an earlier and concurrent care model.

Stigmatization of drinking patients with liver cancer: The role of socioeconomic status

Patients with liver cancer may face stigmatization due to cancer, alcohol consumption, or both. This study addresses gaps in the existing literature regarding stigmatization of alcohol-related liver cancer patients, particularly its connection with socioeconomic status (SES). The study explores whether the SES of a fictional character with alcohol addiction and liver cancer influences stigma levels reported by participants. Additionally, it investigates how participants' personal characteristics, such as alcohol consumption and healthcare professional status, impact stigmatization. This study aims to provide new insights regarding the role of stigmatization in liver cancer treatment and management, emphasizing in socioeconomic determinants. The method is based on three scenarios describing a woman character with alcohol abuse and liver cancer. The scenarios depicted a woman character with either low, medium or high SES. Each participant (N = 991) was randomly assigned to one of the three scenarios. After reading it, each participant answered questionnaires assessing negative attitudes towards the character. Four scales were used: "Negative attributions about people with health problems", "Causality of cancer", "Controllability of drinking" and "Reluctance to helping behavior". Data were analyzed using ANOVA and t-tests. The scenario describing a character with a low SES significantly received more "Negative attributions about people with health problems" than the character with medium or high SES. Participants having higher alcohol consumption themselves showed lower stigma scores for three out of four scales than participants with lower consumption. In addition, participants identified as health professionals had lower stigma scores regarding the scales "Negative attributions about people with health problems" and "Controllability of drinking", and higher scores for the subscale "Reluctance to helping behavior", compared with non-professionals. A character with low SES received more negative attributions than the one with higher SES. Participants' own alcohol consumption and professional status (being health professional or not), influenced their stigmatizing attitudes.

The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System is a valid, reliable, and responsive tool to assess symptom burden in decompensated cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

While there is a growing need for interventions addressing symptom burden in patients with decompensated cirrhosis (DC), the lack of validated symptom assessment tools is a critical barrier. We investigated the psychometric properties of the revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS-r) in a longitudinal cohort of patients with DC.

METHODS

Adult outpatients with DC were prospectively recruited from a liver transplant center and completed ESAS-r at baseline and week 12. We examined reliability, floor/ceiling effects, structural validity, and known-groups validity. We examined the convergent and predictive validity of ESAS-r with health-related quality of life using the Short Form Liver Disease Quality of Life (SF-LDQOL) and responsiveness to changes in anxiety and depression using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 from baseline to week 12.

RESULTS

From August 2018 to September 2022, 218 patients (9% Child-Pugh A, 59% Child-Pugh B, and 32% Child-Pugh C) were prospectively recruited and completed the ESAS-r, SF-LDQOL, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale at baseline and week 12 (n = 135). ESAS-r had strong reliability (Cronbach's alpha 0.86), structural validity (comparative fit index 0.95), known-groups validity (Child-Pugh A: 25.1 vs. B: 37.5 vs. C: 41.4, p = 0.006), and convergent validity (r = -0.67 with SF-LDQOL). Floor effects were 9% and ceiling effects were 0.5%. Changes in ESAS-r scores from baseline to week 12 significantly predicted changes in SF-LDQOL (β = -0.36, p < 0.001), accounting for 30% of the variation. ESAS-r was strongly responsive to clinically meaningful changes in SF-LDQOL, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale.

CONCLUSIONS

ESAS-r is a reliable, valid, and responsive tool for assessing symptom burden in patients with DC and can predict changes in health-related quality of life. Future directions include its implementation as a key outcome measure in cirrhosis care and clinical trials.

Dialysis initiation for patients with decompensated cirrhosis when liver transplant is unlikely

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to describe an approach that emphasizes shared decision-making for patients with decompensated cirrhosis and acute kidney injury when liver transplantation is either not an option, or unlikely to be an option.

RECENT FINDINGS

When acute kidney injury occurs on a background of decompensated cirrhosis, outcomes are generally poor. Providers can also be faced with prognostic uncertainty. A lack of guidance from nephrology and hepatology professional societies means that providers rely on expert opinion or institutional practice patterns.

SUMMARY

For patients who are unlikely to receive liver transplantation, the occurrence of acute kidney injury represents an opportunity for a goals of care conversation. In this article, we share strategies through which providers can incorporate more shared decision-making when caring for these patients. The approach involves creating prognostic consensus amongst multidisciplinary teams and then relying on skilled communicators to share the prognosis. Palliative care consultation can be useful when teams need assistance in the conversations.

Inequity in end-of-life care for patients with chronic liver disease in England

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The World Health Assembly recommends integration of palliative care into treatment of patients with any life-limiting condition, yet patients with non-malignant disease are less likely to receive specialist palliative care (SPC). This study compares SPC offered to patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) versus patients with chronic liver disease without HCC (CLD without HCC).

METHODS

Patients who died from CLD or HCC over 5 years (2013-2017) in England were identified using a dataset linking national data on all hospital admissions (Hospital Episode Statistics - HES) with national mortality data from the Office for National Statistics (HES - ONS). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who received inpatient SPC in their last year of life (LYOL). Secondary outcomes were (1) early inpatient SPC input and (2) the proportion dying in a hospice. The outcomes were compared between patients with HCC and CLD without HCC.

RESULTS

29 669 patients were identified, 8143 of whom had HCC. Patients with HCC were significantly more likely to receive inpatient SPC input-adjusted OR 3.74 (95% CI 3.52-3.97) and early inpatient SPC input-adjusted OR 7.26 (95% CI 6.38-8.25) and die in a hospice OR 8.23 (95% CI 7.33-9.24) than patients with CLD without HCC.

CONCLUSIONS

These data highlight the stark inequity in access to SPC services between patients with HCC and patients with CLD without HCC in England. Addressing these inequities will improve end-of-life care for patients with CLD.

Early Implementation of Palliative and Supportive Care in Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Early palliative and supportive care referral is the standard of care for many malignancies. This paradigm results in improvements in patients' symptoms and quality of life and decreases the costs of medical care and unnecessary procedures. Leading oncology guidelines have recommended the integration of early referral to palliative and supportive services to care pathways for advanced malignancies. Currently, early referral to palliative care within the hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) population is not utilized, with gastroenterology guidelines recommending referral of patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage D to these services. This review addresses this topic through analysis of the existing data within the oncology field as well as literature surrounding palliative care intervention in HCC. Early palliative and supportive care in HCC and its impact on patients, caregivers, and health services allow clinicians and researchers to identify management options that improve outcomes within existing service provisions.

Palliative care experience and perceived gaps in training among transplant hepatology fellows: A national survey

Despite the likely benefits of palliative care (PC) for patients with cirrhosis, physician experiences and perspectives about best practices are variable. We aimed to assess PC experience and gaps in training among transplant hepatology fellows. We conducted a national survey of all transplant hepatology fellows enrolled in accredited fellowship programs during the 2020-2021 academic year. We assessed the frequency of PC provision and comfort with physical and psychological symptom management, psychosocial care, communication skills, advance care planning, and end-of-life care. A total of 45 of 56 (79%) of transplant hepatology fellows responded to the survey; 50% (n = 22) were female. Most trained at centers performing over 100 transplants per year (67%, n = 29) distributed evenly across geographic regions. Most fellows (69%, n = 31) had a PC or hospice care rotation during residency, and 42% (n = 19) of fellows received education in PC during transplant hepatology fellowship. Fellows reported feeling moderately to very comfortable with communication skills such as breaking bad news (93%, n = 41) and leading family meetings (75%, n = 33), but nearly one-third (30%, n = 13) reported feeling not very or not at all comfortable assessing and managing anxiety and depression (30%, n = 13) and spiritual distress (34%, n = 15). Nearly one-quarter (22%, n = 10) had never discussed or documented advance care plans during fellowship. Fellows wished to receive future instruction on the assessment and management of physical symptoms (68%, n = 30) and anxiety and depression (64%, n = 28). Conclusion: Our survey highlights gaps in PC experience and education during transplant hepatology fellowship, lack of comfort in managing psychological distress and advance care planning, and desire to improve skills, particularly in symptom management. Future studies should investigate how to enhance transplant hepatology competencies in these PC domains and whether this impacts clinical care, advance care planning, or patient experience.

Overview of Complications in Cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Cirrhosis is the outcome of chronic liver disease of any etiology due to progressive liver injury and fibrosis. Consequently, cirrhosis leads to portal hypertension and liver dysfunction, progressing to complications like ascites, variceal bleeding, hepatic encephalopathy, hepatorenal syndrome, hepatopulmonary syndrome, cirrhotic cardiomyopathy, sarcopenia, hepatocellular carcinoma, and coagulation disorders. End-stage liver disease leads to an impaired quality of life, loss of social and economic productivity, and reduced survival.

METHODS

This narrative review explains the pathophysiology of complications of cirrhosis, the diagnostic approach and innovative management, with focus on data from India. A comprehensive literature search of the published data was performed in regard with the spectrum, diagnosis, and management of cirrhosis and its complications.

RESULTS

There is a change in the epidemiology of metabolic syndrome, lifestyle diseases, alcohol consumption and the spectrum of etiological diagnosis in patients with cirrhosis. With the advent of universal vaccination and efficacious long-term viral suppression agents for chronic hepatitis B, availability of direct-acting antiviral agents for chronic hepatitis C, and a booming liver transplantation programme across the country, the management of complications is essential. There are several updates in the standard of care in the management of complications of cirrhosis, such as hepatorenal syndrome, hepatocellular carcinoma, and hepatic encephalopathy, and new therapies that address supportive and palliative care in advanced cirrhosis.

CONCLUSION

Prevention, early diagnosis, appropriate management of complications, timely transplantation are cornerstones in the management protocol of cirrhosis and portal hypertension. India needs improved access to care, outreach of public health programmes for viral hepatitis care, health infrastructure, and disease registries for improved healthcare outcomes. Low-cost initiatives like immunization, alcohol cessation, awareness about liver diseases, viral hepatitis elimination, and patient focused decision-making algorithms are essential to manage liver disease in India.