What We Do: Key Activities of an Outpatient Palliative Care Team at an Academic Cancer Center

Care Throughout the Journey-The Interaction Between Primary Care and Palliative Care

Palliative care is no longer synonymous with end-of-life care, and because supply has been well outstripped by demand, much of the practice of palliative care early in a patient's illness journey will take place in the primary care clinic-referred to as primary palliative care. Referral to specialty palliative care for complex symptom management or clarification on decision-making is appropriate, and can facilitate hospice referral, if indicated and in line with patient/family goals.

Conceptual Framework for Integrating Family Caregivers Into the Health Care Team: A Scoping Review

More than 80% of family care partners of older adults are responsible for coordinating care between and among providers; yet, their inclusion in the health care delivery process lacks recognition, coordination, and standardization. Despite efforts to include care partners (e.g., through informal or formal proxy access to their care recipient's patient portal), policies and procedures around care partner inclusion are complex and inconsistently implemented. We conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed articles published from 2015 to 2021 and reviewed a final sample of 45 U.S.-based studies. Few articles specifically examine the inclusion of care partners in health care teams; those that do, do not define or measure care partner inclusion in a standardized way. Efforts to consider care partners as "partners" rather than "visitors" require further consideration of how to build health care teams inclusive of care partners. Incentives for health care organizations and providers to practice inclusive team-building may be required.

Honoring What We Say We Do: Developing Real-World Tools for Routine Family Caregiver Assessment and Support in Outpatient Palliative Care

Background: Family caregivers are essential to the care of patients with serious illness and supporting caregivers alongside patients is a core tenet of palliative care. While there is increasing recognition of the need to support family caregivers, there are limited resources to assess and support their needs in a systematic way in outpatient palliative care practice. Objectives: The aim of this study is to develop an approach to conducting assessments of routine needs and support of family caregivers in outpatient palliative care practice using a quality improvement framework. Setting: Seven, interdisciplinary, outpatient palliative care teams in California collaborated in this study. Measurements: Family caregivers were surveyed about levels of distress and support using a 10-point scale and asked about specific areas of need for support. Usefulness of a supportive caregiver resource was also measured on a 10-point scale, in addition to qualitative assessment of clinician satisfaction and feasibility of routine caregiver assessment and support. Results: Seven hundred thirty-six caregiver needs assessments were conducted and 44 supportive tool kits were distributed. A majority of family caregivers reported moderate or severe distress related to caregiving (score ≥4 on a 10-point scale). The most common sources of distress included emotional distress, worry caregiving was negatively impacting their own health, and planning for the future. Most caregivers reported feeling moderately or very well supported, most commonly by family, friends, and faith/spirituality. Caregivers rated the supportive tool kit an 8.4 on a 10-point usefulness scale and 92% would recommend it to others. Conclusions: We successfully developed and piloted practical clinical tools for routine family caregiver screening and support.

Enhanced supportive care for advanced cancer patients: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Early palliative care along with standard cancer treatments is recommended in current clinical guidelines to improve the quality of life and survival of cancer patients. This study protocol aims to evaluate the effect of "Enhanced Supportive Care", an early primary palliative care provided by nurses.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial (RCT) will be conducted including advanced cancer patients scheduled for first-line palliative chemotherapy (N=360) and their caregivers in South Korea. Participants will be randomly assigned to the intervention or control group in a 1:1 ratio. Participants in the intervention group will receive the "Enhanced Supportive Care", which provides five sessions of symptom management and coping enhancement counseling by nurses. The control group will receive symptom monitoring five times. The primary endpoints are symptoms, coping, and quality of life (QoL) at 3 months. Secondary endpoints are symptoms, coping, and QoL at 6 months, depression and self-efficacy for coping with cancer at 3 and 6 months, symptom and depression change from baseline to 3 months, survival at 6 and 12 months among patients, and depression among caregivers at 3 and 6 months.

DISCUSSION

This RCT will evaluate the effects of "Enhanced Supportive Care" on symptoms, depression, coping, self-efficacy for coping with cancer, QoL and survival of patients, as well as depression of caregivers. It will provide evidence of a strategy to implement early primary palliative care provided by nurses, which may consequently improve cancer care for newly diagnosed patients with advanced stage cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04407013. Registered on May 29, 2020, https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/ct2/show/study/NCT04407013 . The protocol version is ESC 1.0.

An Educational Needs Assessment for Outpatient Palliative Care Clinicians

Introduction: As the field of palliative medicine continues to grow in community-based settings, outpatient palliative care clinics have become an important site for providing upstream palliative care to patients and families. It is unclear whether current training models, focused predominantly on the inpatient setting, adequately prepare clinicians for outpatient palliative care practice. Methods: We performed an online educational needs assessment survey of physicians and advanced practice providers working in outpatient palliative care clinics. Survey questions focused on the importance of specific palliative care knowledge, skills, and attitudes in outpatient practice using the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education Hospice and Palliative Medicine (HPM) curricular milestones to guide survey development. We also explored clinician perception of training adequacy and current educational needs relevant to outpatient practice. Results: One hundred sixty-four clinicians, including 122 (74.4%) physicians, 32 (19.5%) nurse practitioners, and 8 (4.9%) physician assistants, completed our survey. Clinicians had a median of 10 years of HPM experience and 6 years of outpatient experience. We identified two main areas of perceived knowledge or skill deficit: navigating insurance and prior authorizations and co-management of pain and opioid use disorder. Conclusion: Addressing gaps in education and preparedness for outpatient practice is essential to improve clinician competence and efficiency as well as patient care, safety, and care coordination. This study identifies practice management and opioid stewardship as potential targets for educational interventions. The development of curricula related to these outpatient skills may improve clinicians' ability to provide safe, patient-centered care with confidence.

Outpatient Palliative Care for Noncancer Illnesses: One Program's Experience with Implementation, Impact, and Lessons Learned

Background: Despite substantial palliative care (PC) needs in people with serious illnesses other than cancer, outpatient PC is less available to these populations. Objectives: Describe the experience, impact, and lessons learned from implementing an outpatient PC service (OPCS) for people with noncancer illnesses. Design: Observational cohort study. Setting/Subjects: Patients seen by an OPCS at a United States academic medical center October 2, 2017-March 31, 2021. Measurements: Patient demographics and clinical characteristics, care processes, rates of advance care planning (ACP), and health care utilization. Results: During the study period, 736 patients were seen. Mean age was 66.7 years, 47.7% were women, and 61.4% were White. Nearly half (44.9%) had a neurologic diagnosis, 19.2% pulmonary, and 11.0% cardiovascular. Patients were most often referred for symptoms other than pain (62.2%), ACP (60.2%), and support for patient/family (48.2%). Three-quarters (74.1%) of visits occurred by video. A PC physician, nurse, social worker, and spiritual care provider addressed nonpain symptoms (for 79.2%), family caregiver needs (70.0%), psychosocial distress (69.9%), ACP (68.8%), care coordination (66.8%), pain (38.2%), and spiritual concerns (27.8%). Rates of advance directives increased from 24.6% to 31.8% (p < 0.001) and Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment forms from 15.6% to 27.3% (p < 0.001). Of 214 patients who died, 61.7% used hospice, with median hospice length-of-stay >30 days. Comparing the six months before initiating PC to the six months after, hospitalizations decreased by 31.3% (p = 0.001) and hospital days decreased by 29.8% (p = 0.02). Conclusions: Outpatient PC for people with noncancer illnesses is feasible, addresses needs in multiple domains, and is associated with increased rates of ACP and decreased health care utilization. Controlled studies are warranted.

Comparing the Palliative Care Needs of Patients Seen by Specialty Palliative Care Teams at Home Versus in Clinic

CONTEXT

Understanding the unique needs of patients seen in clinic versus at home can help palliative care (PC) teams choose how to maximize available resources.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the characteristics and PC needs of patients seen by PC teams in clinic versus at home.

METHODS

We analyzed data from the Palliative Care Quality Network between August 2016 and September 2019 and compared demographics, diagnosis, reason for referral, PC needs, functional status, self-reported symptoms, and patient-reported quality of life.

RESULTS

Compared to patients receiving PC in clinic, patients receiving PC at home were more likely to be of age 80 years or older (odds ratio [OR] 7.5, 95% CI 5.0, 10.9, P < 0.0001), have lower functional status (mean Palliative Performance Scale score 53% vs. 68%, P < 0.0001), and were less likely to screen positive for needing pain management (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.22, 0.42, P < 0.0001) or other symptom management (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.41, 0.90, P = 0.01). Patients receiving care at home were more likely to be referred for care planning (goals of care discussions or advance care planning) (OR 11.5, 95% CI 8.3, 16.0 P < 0.0001) and patient/family support (OR 5.9, 95% CI 4.2, 8.3, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Patients seen by PC teams at home had worse function and were more likely to be referred for care planning, while patients seen in clinic had more PC needs related to pain and symptom management. Despite these differences, both populations have significant PC needs that support routine assessment and require appropriately staffed interdisciplinary teams to address these needs.

"I'm Dealing With That": Illness Concerns of African American and White Cancer Patients While Undergoing Active Cancer Treatments

BACKGROUND

National oncology guidelines recommend early integration of palliative care for patients with cancer. However, drivers for this integration remain understudied. Understanding illness concerns at the time of cancer treatment may help facilitate integration earlier in the cancer illness trajectory.

OBJECTIVE

To describe cancer patients' concerns while undergoing cancer treatment, and determine if concerns differ among African Americans and Whites.

METHODS

A 1-time, semi-structured qualitative interview was conducted with a purposive subsample of cancer patients participating in a larger study of illness concerns. Eligible patients were undergoing cancer treatments and had self-reported moderate-to-severe pain in the last week. Analysis encompassed a qualitative descriptive approach with inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Participants (16 African American, 16 White) had a median age of 53 and were predominantly females (72%) with stage III/IV cancer (53%). Illness concerns were largely consistent across participants and converged on 3 themes: symptom experience (pain, options to manage pain), cancer care delivery (communication, care coordination and care transitions), and practical concerns (access to community and health system resources, financial toxicity).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings extend the scope of factors that could be utilized to integrate palliative care earlier in the cancer illness trajectory, moving beyond the symptoms- and prognosis-based triggers that typify current referrals to also consider diverse logistical concerns. Using this larger set of concerns aids anticipatory risk mitigation and planning (e.g. care transitions, financial toxicity), helps patients receive a larger complement of support services, and builds cancer patients' capacity toward a more patient-centered treatment and care experience.

Staffing in California Public Hospital Palliative Care Clinics: A Report from the California Health Care Foundation Palliative Care in Public Hospitals Learning Community

Background: Although clinic-based palliative care (PC) services have spread in the United States, little is known about how they function, and no studies have examined clinics that predominantly serve safety net populations. Objectives: To describe the PC clinics operating in safety net institutions in California. Design: Survey completed by PC program leaders Setting/Subjects: PC programs in California, USA, safety net medical centers. Measurements: Descriptive statistics regarding staffing, clinic processes, patients served, and finances. Results: Twelve of 15 programs responded; 10 clinics that met inclusion criteria. All 10 programs use multiple disciplines to deliver care. Average full-time equivalent (FTE) used to staff an average of 2.75 half-day clinics per week includes 0.69 physician FTE, 0.51 nurse practitioner FTE, 1.37 nurse FTE, 0.79 social worker FTE, and 0.52 chaplain FTE. Clinic session schedules include an average of 1.88 new patient appointment slots (standard deviation [SD] = 0.44) and four follow-up appointment slots (SD = 1.95). The nine programs that reported on clinic volumes see 1081 patients annually combined, with an annual average of 120 (SD = 48.53) per program. Encounters per patient averaged 3.04 (SD = 1.59; eight programs reporting). All reported offering seven core PC services: pain/symptom management, comprehensive assessment, care coordination, advance care planning, PC plan of care, emotional support, and social service referrals. An average of 77.4% (SD = 26.81) of clinic financing came from the health systems. Conclusions: Our respondents report using an interdisciplinary team approach to deliver guideline-concordant specialty PC. More research is needed to understand the most effective and efficient staffing models for meeting the PC needs of the safety net population.

Patient and Caregiver Experience with Outpatient Palliative Care Telemedicine Visits

Background: Telemedicine visits reduce the physical and financial burdens associated with in-person appointments, especially for patients with serious illness. Little is known about patient and caregiver preferences regarding telemedicine visit timing and the discussion of sensitive topics by telemedicine.

Objective: To characterize the experience of patients with serious illness and their caregivers receiving palliative care (PC) by telemedicine.

Design: Mixed-methods telephone survey.

Setting/Subjects: Patients and family caregivers who had at least one telemedicine visit with the outpatient PC team at our urban academic medical center.

Results: A total of 35 patients and 15 caregivers were surveyed. Patient mean age was 61 years, 49% had cancer, and 86% were Caucasian. Caregiver mean age was 62 years. Mean satisfaction with PC telemedicine visits was 8.9 out of 10 for patients; 8.8 for caregivers. Patients (97%) and caregivers (100%) felt comfortable discussing sensitive topics over video. Participants felt telemedicine was an acceptable format to discuss most sensitive topics but 53% of caregivers preferred to receive bad news in person. Participants valued the convenience of telemedicine; they had concerns about rapport building and desired a more user-friendly telemedicine platform.

Conclusions: Patients with serious illness and their caregivers rated telemedicine visits highly and felt comfortable discussing sensitive topics by video. Concerns included rapport building and telemedicine platform setup and quality. The rapid growth of telemedicine during coronavirus disease 2019 creates an imperative for research to understand the impact on the quality of care and mitigate any negative effects of telemedicine within a diverse population of patients.

Impact of Interdisciplinary Outpatient Specialty Palliative Care on Survival and Quality of Life in Adults With Advanced Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

In advanced cancer, patients want to know how their care options may affect survival and quality of life, but the impact of outpatient specialty palliative care on these outcomes in cancer is uncertain.

PURPOSE

To estimate the impact of outpatient specialty palliative care programs on survival and quality of life in adults with advanced cancer.

METHODS

Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing outpatient specialty palliative care with usual care in adults with advanced cancer. Primary outcomes were 1 year survival and quality of life. Analyses were stratified to compare preliminary studies against higher-quality studies. Secondary outcomes were survival at other endpoints and physical and psychological quality-of-life measures.

RESULTS

From 2,307 records, we identified nine studies for review, including five high-quality studies. In the three high-quality studies with long-term survival data (n = 646), patients randomized to outpatient specialty palliative care had a 14% absolute increase in 1 year survival relative to controls (56% vs. 42%, p < .001). The survival advantage was also observed at 6, 9, 15, and 18 months, and median survival was 4.56 months longer (14.55 vs. 9.99 months). In the five high-quality studies with quality-of-life data (n = 1,398), outpatient specialty palliative care improved quality-of-life relative to controls (g = .18, p < .001), including for physical and psychological measures.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with advanced cancer randomized to receive outpatient specialty palliative care lived longer and had better quality of life. Findings have implications for improving care in advanced cancer.

Embedded palliative care for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a mixed-methods pilot study

PURPOSE

Palliative care is recommended for patients with metastatic cancer, but there has been limited research about embedded palliative care for specific patient populations. We describe the impact of a pilot program that provided routine, early, integrated palliative care to patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Mixed methods pre-post intervention cohort study at an academic cancer center. Thirty control then 30 intervention patients with metastatic colorectal cancer were surveyed at baseline and 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months thereafter about symptoms, quality-of-life, and likelihood of cure. We compared survey responses, trends over time, rates of advance care planning, and healthcare utilization between groups. Patients, family caregivers, and clinicians were interviewed.

RESULTS

Patients in the intervention group were followed for an average of 6.5 months and had an average of 3.5 palliative care visits. At baseline, symptoms were mild (average 1.85/10) and 78.2% of patients reported good/excellent quality-of-life. Half (50.9%) believed they were likely to be cured of cancer. Over time, symptoms and quality-of-life metrics remained similar between groups, however intervention patients were more realistic about their likelihood of cure (p = 0.008). Intervention patients were more likely to have a surrogate documented (83.3% vs. 26.7%, p < 0.0001), an advance directive completed (63.3% vs. 13.3%, p < 0.0001), and non-full code status (43.3% vs. 16.7%, p < 0.03). All patients and family caregivers would recommend the program to others with cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

We describe the impact of an embedded palliative care program for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, which improved prognostic awareness and rates of advance care planning.

Models of Palliative Care Delivery for Patients With Cancer

Palliative care has evolved over the past five decades as an interprofessional specialty to improve quality of life and quality of care for patients with cancer and their families. Existing evidence supports that timely involvement of specialist palliative care teams can enhance the care delivered by oncology teams. This review provides a state-of-the-science synopsis of the literature that supports each of the five clinical models of specialist palliative care delivery, including outpatient clinics, inpatient consultation teams, acute palliative care units, community-based palliative care, and hospice care. The roles of embedded clinics, nurse-led models, telehealth interventions, and primary palliative care also will be discussed. Outpatient clinics represent the key point of entry for timely access to palliative care. In this setting, patient care can be enhanced longitudinally through impeccable symptom management, monitoring, education, and advance care planning. Inpatient consultation teams provide expert symptom management and facilitate discharge planning for acutely symptomatic hospitalized patients. Patients with the highest level of distress and complexity may benefit from an admission to acute palliative care units. In contrast, community-based palliative care and hospice care are more appropriate for patients with a poor performance status and low to moderate symptom burden. Each of these five models of specialist palliative care serve a different patient population along the disease continuum and complement one another to provide comprehensive supportive care. Additional research is needed to define the standards for palliative care interventions and to refine the models to further improve access to quality palliative care.

State of palliative care services at US cancer centers: An updated national survey

BACKGROUND

This study examined the changes in outpatient palliative care services at US cancer centers over the past decade.

METHODS

Between April and August 2018, all National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer centers and a random sample of 1252 non-NCI-designated cancer centers were surveyed. Two surveys used previously in a 2009 national study were sent to each institution: a 22-question cancer center executive survey regarding palliative care infrastructure and attitudes toward palliative care and an 82-question palliative care program leader survey regarding detailed palliative care structures and processes. Survey findings from 2018 were compared with 2009 data from 101 cancer center executives and 96 palliative care program leaders.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 69% (140 of 203) for the cancer center executive survey and 75% (123 of 164) for the palliative care program leader survey. Among NCI-designated cancer centers, a significant increase in outpatient palliative care clinics was observed between 2009 and 2018 (59% vs 95%; odds ratio, 12.3; 95% confidence interval, 3.2-48.2; P < .001) with no significant changes in inpatient consultation teams (92% vs 90%; P = .71), palliative care units (PCUs; 26% vs 40%; P = .17), or institution-operated hospices (31% vs 18%; P = .14). Among non-NCI-designated cancer centers, there was no significant increase in outpatient palliative care clinics (22% vs 40%; P = .07), inpatient consultation teams (56% vs 68%; P = .27), PCUs (20% vs 18%; P = .76), or institution-operated hospices (42% vs 23%; P = .05). The median interval from outpatient palliative care referral to death increased significantly, particularly for NCI-designated cancer centers (90 vs 180 days; P = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite significant growth in outpatient palliative care clinics, there remain opportunities for improvement in the structures and processes of palliative care programs.

Statewide Differences in Personality Associated with Geographic Disparities in Access to Palliative Care: Findings on Openness

Background: Geographic disparities in access to palliative care cause unnecessary suffering near the end-of-life in low-access U.S. states. The psychological mechanisms accounting for state-level variation are poorly understood. Objective: To examine whether statewide differences in personality account for variation in palliative care access. Design: We combined 5 state-level datasets that included the 50 states and national capital. Palliative care access was measured by the Center to Advance Palliative Care 2015 state-by-state report card. State-level personality differences in openness, conscientiousness, agreeableness, neuroticism, and extraversion were identified in a report on 619,387 adults. The Census and Gallup provided covariate data. Regression analyses examined whether state-level personality predicted state-level palliative care access, controlling for population size, age, gender, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and political views. Sensitivity analyses controlled for rurality, nonprofit status, and hospital size. Results: Palliative care access was higher in states that were older, less racially diverse, higher in socioeconomic status, more liberal, and, as hypothesized, higher in openness. In regression analyses accounting for all predictors and covariates, higher openness continued to account for better state-level access to palliative care (β = 0.428, p = 0.008). Agreeableness also emerged as predicting better access. In sensitivity analyses, personality findings persisted, and less rural states and those with more nonprofits had better access. Conclusions: Palliative care access is worse in states lower in openness, meaning where residents are more skeptical, traditional, and concrete. Personality theory offers recommendations for palliative care advocates communicating with administrators, legislators, philanthropists, and patients to expand access in low-openness states.