Racial and ethnic variation in pain following inpatient palliative care consultations

Naming racism as a root cause of inequities in palliative care research: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Racial and ethnic inequities in palliative care are well-established. The way researchers design and interpret studies investigating race- and ethnicity-based disparities has future implications on the interventions aimed to reduce these inequities. If racism is not discussed when contextualizing findings, it is less likely to be addressed and inequities will persist.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the characteristics of 12 years of academic literature that investigates race- or ethnicity-based disparities in palliative care access, outcomes and experiences, and determine the extent to which racism is discussed when interpreting findings.

METHODS

Following Arksey & O'Malley's methodology for scoping reviews, we searched bibliographic databases for primary, peer reviewed studies globally, in all languages, that collected race or ethnicity variables in a palliative care context (January 1, 2011 to October 17, 2023). We recorded study characteristics and categorized citations based on their research focus-whether race or ethnicity were examined as a major focus (analyzed as a primary independent variable or population of interest) or minor focus (analyzed as a secondary variable) of the research purpose, and the interpretation of findings-whether authors directly or indirectly discussed racism when contextualizing the study results.

RESULTS

We identified 3000 citations and included 181 in our review. Of these, most were from the United States (88.95%) and examined race or ethnicity as a major focus (71.27%). When interpreting findings, authors directly named racism in 7.18% of publications. They were more likely to use words closely associated with racism (20.44%) or describe systemic or individual factors (41.44%). Racism was directly named in 33.33% of articles published since 2021 versus 3.92% in the 10 years prior, suggesting it is becoming more common.

CONCLUSION

While the focus on race and ethnicity in palliative care research is increasing, there is room for improvement when acknowledging systemic factors - including racism - during data analysis. Researchers must be purposeful when investigating race and ethnicity, and identify how racism shapes palliative care access, outcomes and experiences of racially and ethnically minoritized patients.

Does ethnicity affect pain management for people with advanced disease? A mixed methods cross-national systematic review of 'very high' Human Development Index English-speaking countries

BACKGROUND

Racial disparities in pain management have been observed in the USA since the 1990s in settings such as the emergency department and oncology. However, the palliative care context is not well described, and little research has focused outside of the USA or on advanced disease. This review takes a cross-national approach to exploring pain management in advanced disease for people of different racial and ethnic groups.

METHODS

Mixed methods systematic review. The primary outcome measure was differences in receiving pain medication between people from different racial and ethnic groups. Five electronic databases were searched. Two researchers independently assessed quality using JBI checklists, weighted evidence, and extracted data. The quantitative findings on the primary outcome measure were cross-tabulated, and a thematic analysis was undertaken on the mixed methods studies. Themes were formulated into a conceptual/thematic matrix. Patient representatives from UK ethnically diverse groups were consulted. PRISMA 2020 guidelines were followed.

RESULTS

Eighteen papers were included in the primary outcome analysis. Three papers were rated 'High' weight of evidence, and 17/18 (94%) were based in the USA. Ten of the eighteen (56%) found no significant difference in the pain medication received between people of different ethnic groups. Forty-six papers were included in the mixed methods synthesis; 41/46 (89%) were based in the USA. Key themes: Patients from different ethnically diverse groups had concerns about tolerance, addiction and side effects. The evidence also showed: cultural and social doctor-patient communication issues; many patients with unmet pain management needs; differences in pain assessment by racial group, and two studies found racial and ethnic stereotyping.

CONCLUSIONS

There was not enough high quality evidence to draw a conclusion on differences in receiving pain medication for people with advanced disease from different racial and ethnic groups. The mixed methods findings showed commonalities in fears about pain medication side effects, tolerance and addiction across diverse ethnic groups. However, these fears may have different foundations and are differently prioritised according to culture, faith, educational and social factors. There is a need to develop culturally competent pain management to address doctor-patient communication issues and patients' pain management concerns.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO- CRD42020167890 .

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines on the management of pain in older people – a summary report

Objective:

The objective of this study is to develop an update of the evidence-based guidelines for the management of pain in older people.

Design:

Review of evidence since 2010 using a systematic and consensus approach is performed.

Results:

Recognition of the type of pain and routine assessment of pain should inform the use of specific environmental, behavioural and pharmacological interventions. Individualised care plans and analgesic protocols for specific clinical situations, patients and health care settings can be developed from these guidelines.

Conclusion:

Management of pain must be considered as an important component of the health care provided to all people, regardless of their chronological age or severity of illness. By clearly outlining areas where evidence is not available, these guidelines may also stimulate further research. To use the recommended therapeutic approaches, clinicians must be familiar with adverse effects of treatment and the potential for drug interactions.

Ethnic Differences Identified by Pain Sensitivity Questionnaire Correlate With Clinical Pain Responses

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The Pain Sensitivity Questionnaire, English version (PSQ-E), is predictive of pain-related responses to experimental stimuli. Ethnic differences have been noted in experimental measures of pain sensation using quantitative sensory testing. The present study sought to determine if the PSQ-E also identified similar ethnic differences.

METHODS

Fifty-seven subjects who self-identified as African Americans (AAs) and who were scheduled to undergo a low-back interventional procedure completed the PSQ-E and other questionnaires. Their data were compared with an age-, sex-, and opioid usage-matched sample of 57 self-identified non-Hispanic white (NHW) subjects. Pain ratings on a visual analog scale (VAS) were obtained following 2 standardized injections of subcutaneous lidocaine (VAS1-infiltration in hand, VAS2-infiltration of procedural site). Correlations between PSQ-E scores, VAS measures, and other inventories were tested.

RESULTS

The PSQ-E scores and clinical and experimental pain scores were all significantly elevated in AA compared with NHW patients (P < 0.05 for experimental pain scores, P < 0.001 for PSQ and clinical pain scores). Measures of pain interference, depression, anxiety, and pain catastrophizing were not different between groups. Similar to our previous study, PSQ-E scores significantly correlated with both experimental and clinical pain scores (eg, PSQ-E with Brief Pain Inventory pain score: r = 0.39, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The study demonstrated significantly elevated pain sensitivity in AA compared with NHW patients as measured by the PSQ-E and experimental and clinical pain intensity scores. This shows that the PSQ reflects the known elevation of pain sensitivity in AA subjects and suggests that it may be useful in assessing pain treatment disparities by identifying and standardizing differences in pain sensitivity.

Identifying Opportunities to Improve Pain Among Patients With Serious Illness

CONTEXT

Pain is a common and distressing symptom. Pain management is a core competency for palliative care (PC) teams.

OBJECTIVE

Identify characteristics associated with pain and pain improvement among inpatients referred to PC.

METHODS

Thirty-eight inpatient PC teams in the Palliative Care Quality Network entered data about patients seen between December 12, 2012 and March 15, 2016. We examined patient and care characteristics associated with pain and pain improvement.

RESULTS

Of patients who could self-report symptoms, 30.7% (4959 of 16,158) reported moderate-to-severe pain at first assessment. Over 40% of these patients had not been referred to PC for pain. Younger patients (P < 0.0001), women (P < 0.0001), patients with cancer (P < 0.0001), and patients in medical/surgical units (P < 0.0001) were more likely to report pain. Patients with pain had higher rates of anxiety (P < 0.0001), nausea (P < 0.0001), and dyspnea (P < 0.0001). Sixty-eight percent of patients with moderate-to-severe pain improved by the PC team's second assessment within 72 hours; 74.7% improved by final assessment. There was a significant variation in the rate of pain improvement between PC teams (P < 0.0001). Improvement in pain was associated with improvement in anxiety (OR = 2.9, P < 0.0001) and dyspnea (OR = 1.4, P = 0.03). Patients who reported an improvement in pain had shorter hospital length-of-stay by two days (P = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

Pain is common among inpatients referred to PC. Three-quarters of patients with pain improve and improvement in pain is associated with other symptom improvement. Standardized, multisite data collection can identify PC patients likely to have marked and refractory pain, create benchmarks for the field, and identify best practices to inform quality improvement.

Pain Assessment, Management, and Control Among Patients 65 Years or Older Receiving Hospice Care in the U.S

CONTEXT

Knowledge is limited regarding pain assessment and management practices, as well as pain-related outcomes in hospice care.

OBJECTIVES

To generate national estimates of pain assessment and management practices and outcomes of pain control among patients 65 years or older receiving hospice care in the U.S. and identify hospice discharge and agency characteristics predicting study outcomes.

METHODS

The 2007 National Home Health and Hospice Care Survey was analyzed. Multivariate logistic regressions were estimated to identify discharge and agency characteristics predicting guideline-concordant pain assessment and management practices and pain control outcomes.

RESULTS

A high percentage of discharges had pain assessment at admission (97%) and before discharge (93%); use of valid pain rating scales was relatively low (69% and 54% for first and last assessments, respectively). Almost 95% of patients received pain medication, but only 42% received nonpharmacologic therapies. About 70% of patients assessed with a valid pain scale saw improvement in the level of pain or remained free of pain from admission to discharge. Non-Hispanic blacks were less likely to have pain assessments, and Hispanics were less likely to receive opioid analgesics or to have pain-free status at discharge, compared with non-Hispanic whites. Patients receiving care from for-profit (vs. nonprofit) agencies were more likely to receive pain assessment with a valid scale before discharge but less likely to experience pain control or improvement.

CONCLUSION

Greater use of valid pain assessment scales and nonpharmacologic therapies constitutes areas for improvement in hospice care. Targeted interventions are needed to address disparities in pain care by patient race and/or ethnicity and agency ownership status.

At the Grave We Make Our Song: A Palliative Care Study in Rural Guatemala

Purpose: We sought to understand decision making, family involvement, and cultural factors that influence palliative care for Guatemalans. Design: A qualitative descriptive study was conducted in Guatemala to explore palliative care experiences among seven participants. Findings: The overarching theme was Relief from Suffering, reinforced by three support systems: the family, community rezadora, and priest. The family made decisions and provided physical care. The rezadora sang prayers and prepared the home altar. The priest provided traditional sacraments. Discussion: The role of the rezadora should be considered in providing palliative care to Guatemalans. Some Guatemalans are unfamiliar with or have difficulty understanding the role of the nurse in palliative and end-of-life care. Implications: We suggest training opportunities using international resources to enhance the role for Guatemalan nurses in end-of-life care. Palliative care nurses in the United States may benefit from incorporating the rezadora into strategies that extend these services to Guatemalans.

Impact of Race/Ethnicity on Pain Management Outcomes in a Community-Based Teaching Hospital Following Inpatient Palliative Care Consultation

Objective

To examine race/ethnicity differences in pain management outcomes following inpatient palliative care consultation.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study based on data from a community-based teaching hospital in Fresno, CA, USA, from April 2014 to July 2015. One hundred sixty-one patients with life-limiting diagnoses and palliative care pain-related consultations were included. The patients were categorized into four racial groups: Caucasians, African-Americans, Hispanics, and Asians/Others. Demographics and baseline pain scores using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) were obtained. The outcome measures included the length of stay, time to consult, and pain scores at admission, 24 hours before the consultation, 24–48 hours after consultation, and at discharge.

Results

The initial median pain scores were not significantly different between the groups, however, the Asians had slightly higher pain scores compared to the other groups. African-Americans, Caucasians, and Hispanics had significant differences in pain outcomes after consultation compared to 24 hours prior to consultation (p = 0.01, p < 0.01 and p = 0.02, respectively). Caucasians and Hispanics had significant differences in pain outcomes after palliative consultation compared to initial admission assessment (p < 0.01). The differences between discharge and admission pain scores were significant only for Asians, Caucasians, and Hispanics (p = 0.04, p < 0.01, p < 0.01, respectively) but not African-Americans. There were no significant pain score differences across the racial groups following consultations.

Conclusion

There were no significant differences in pain reduction amongst the racial groups, suggesting that pain can adequately be managed in individual racial groups after inpatient palliative care consultations.

Direct Engagement With Communities and Interprofessional Learning to Factor Culture Into End-of-Life Health Care Delivery

Aging patients with advanced or terminal illnesses or at the end of their lives become highly vulnerable when their cultural needs-in terms of ethnic habits, religious beliefs, and language-are unmet. Cultural diversity should be taken into account during palliative care delivery (i.e., noncurative, supportive care during advanced illness or at the end of life). Providers and systems deliver disparate palliative care to diverse patients. I present 2 strategies to improve how culturally diverse populations are served during advanced illness: (1) health service provider assessment of local populations to understand service populations' cultural needs and guide services and policy; and (2) interprofessional education to improve multicultural understanding among the health care workforce.

Does Disclosure of Terminal Prognosis Mean Losing Hope? Insights from Exploring Patient Perspectives on Their Experience of Palliative Care Consultations

BACKGROUND

A primary barrier to physician disclosure of terminal prognosis is concern that patients will lose hope. Inpatient palliative care (IPC) teams are especially posed to mediate this barrier, but little is known about patient perceptions and experience of IPC.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to elicit seriously ill patients' perspective and experience of an IPC consultation, and to explore patient attitudes toward information derived from the consultation.

METHODS

An exploratory, qualitative study was conducted at a large nonprofit community hospital in the Los Angeles area. An established IPC team conducted individualized consults with patients and families within 24 hours of referral. Eligible participants were English-speaking adults, aged 18 or over, who had received an IPC consultation within the previous week during their hospitalization. Purposive recruitment of patients was conducted by the IPC social worker. Interviews were conducted at bedside using a semistructured interview protocol employing open-ended questions.

RESULTS

Twelve seriously ill patients were interviewed. Four themes were identified from the interview transcripts: (1) holistic care approach, (2) knowledge/information gained, (3) hope and enlightenment, and (4) patient readiness.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that disclosure of a terminal prognosis does not mean loss of patient hope. Instead, hope was redefined on a goal other than cure. Presenting patients with information and increasing their knowledge about care options and resources may facilitate patients in identifying meaningful goals that are better aligned with their prognosis.