Impact of palliative care consult service in inpatient hospital setting: a systematic literature review

Use of inpatient palliative care in metastatic urethral cancer

BACKGROUND

In metastatic urethral cancer, temporal trends, and patterns of inpatient palliative care (IPC) use are unknown.

METHODS

Relying on the National Inpatient Sample (2006-2019), metastatic urethral cancer patients were stratified according to IPC use. Estimated annual percentage changes (EAPC) analyses and multivariable logistic regression models (LRM) for the prediction of IPC use were fitted.

RESULTS

Of 1,106 metastatic urethral cancer patients, 199 (18%) received IPC. IPC use increased from 5.8 to 28.0% over time in the overall cohort (EAPC +9.8%; P < 0.001), from <12.5 to 35.1% (EAPC +11.2%; P < 0.001), and from <12.5 to 24.7% (EAPC +9.4%; P = 0.01) in respectively females and males. Lowest IPC rates were recorded in the Midwest (13.5%) vs. highest in the South (22.5%). IPC patients were more frequently female (44 vs. 37%), and more frequently exhibited bone metastases (45 vs. 34%). In multivariable LRM, female sex (multivariable odds ratio [OR] 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-2.02; P = 0.02), and bone metastases (OR 1.46, 95%CI 1.02-2.10; P = 0.04) independently predicted higher IPC rates. Conversely, hospitalization in the Midwest (OR 0.53, 95%CI 0.31-0.91; P = 0.02), and in the Northeast (OR 0.48, 95%CI 0.28-0.82; P = 0.01) were both associated with lower IPC use than hospitalization in the West.

CONCLUSION

IPC use in metastatic urethral cancer increased from a marginal rate of 5.8% to as high as 28%. Ideally, differences according to sex, metastatic site, and region should be addressed to improve IPC use rates.

End of Life Outcomes Following Comfort Care Orders: A Single Center Experience

Background: Few studies have explored the outcomes of patients placed on comfort care with respect to hospice disposition. The objective of this study was to perform a retrospective analysis of patients who transitioned to comfort care. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of patients placed on the comfort care order set between July 1st, 2021, until June 30th, 2022. Each individual patient chart was then analyzed to collect multiple clinical variables. IRB approval was obtained as per institutional guidelines. Results: 541 patients were included in the analysis. An average of 1.5 patients were placed on comfort care a day. 424 (78.37%) patients died while in the hospital. The median time on comfort care was 1 day. For subspecialty and hospital medicine patients the median time was 2 days. 40% of non-ICU patients were discharged with hospice services. 60% of patients were in the intensive care unit (ICU) and spent a median of 2.33 hours on comfort care. 19% of these patients were on comfort care for over 12 hours. 94% of the patients placed on comfort care in the ICU died in the hospital as compared to 53% of subspecialty and 59% of hospital medicine patients. Conclusions: The majority of patients placed on comfort care died during their hospitalization demonstrating a real need for comprehensive end of life care and immediate hospice services. For those discharged with hospice services, they spent an excessive amount of time in the hospital waiting for services to be arranged.

The Variation of Withdrawal of Life Sustaining Therapy in Older Adults With Traumatic Brain Injury

INTRODUCTION

The decision to withdraw life sustaining treatment (WDLST) in older adults with traumatic brain injury is subject to wide variability leading to nonbeneficial interventions and unnecessary use of hospital resources. We hypothesized that patient and hospital factors are associated with WDLST and WDLST timing.

METHODS

All traumatic brain injury patients ≥65 with Glasgow coma scores (GCS) of 4-11 from 2018 to 2019 at level I and II centers were selected from the National Trauma Data Bank. Patients with head abbreviated injury scores 5-6 or death within 24 h were excluded. Bayesian additive regression tree analysis was performed to identify the cumulative incidence function (CIF) and the relative risks (RR) over time for withdrawal of care, discharge to hospice (DH), and death. Death alone (no WDLST or DH) served as the comparator group for all analyses. A subanalysis of the composite outcome WDLST/DH (defined as end-of-life-care), with death (no WDLST or DH) as a comparator cohort was performed.

RESULTS

We included 2126 patients, of whom 1957 (57%) underwent WDLST, 402 (19%) died, and 469 (22%) were DH. 60% of patients were male, and the mean age was 80 y. The majority of patients were injured by fall (76%, n = 1644). Patients who were DH were more often female (51% DH versus 39% WDLST), had a past medical history of dementia (45% DH versus 18% WDLST), and had lower admission injury severity score (14 DH versus 18.6 WDLST) (P < 0.001). Compared to those who DH, those who underwent WDLST had a lower GCS (9.8 versus 8.4, P < 0.001). CIF of WDSLT and DH increased with age, stabilizing by day 3. At day 3, patients ≥90 y had an increased RR of DH compared to WDLST (RR 2.5 versus 1.4). As GCS increased, CIF and RR of WDLST decreased, while CIF and RR of DH increased (RR on day 3 for GCS 12: WDLST 0.42 versus DH 1.31).Patients at nonprofit institutions were more likely to undergo WDLST (RR 1.15) compared to DH (0.68). Compared to patients of White race, patients of Black race had a lower RR of WDLST at all timepoints.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient and hospital factors influence the practice of end-of-life-care (WDLST, DH, and death), highlighting the need to better understand variability to target palliative care interventions and standardize care across populations and trauma centers.

Symptom Management and Support in Dying Patients with Cancer and Coronavirus Disease-19-A Register-Based Study

OBJECTIVE

Little is known to what extent access to specialist palliative care (SPC) for cancer patients dying with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) affects the occurrence of breakthrough symptoms, symptom relief, and overall care, compared to hospital deaths. Our aim was to include patients with both COVID-19 and cancer and compare those dying in hospitals with those dying in SPC with reference to the quality of end-of-life care.

METHODS

Patients with both cancer and COVID-19 who died in hospitals (n = 430) and within SPC (n = 384) were identified from the Swedish Register of Palliative Care. The hospital and SPC groups were compared regarding the quality of end-of-life care, including the occurrence of 6 breakthrough symptoms during the last week in life, symptom relief, end-of-life care decisions, information, support, and human presence at death.

RESULTS

Breakthrough of breathlessness was more common in the hospital patients compared to the SPC patients (61% and 39%, respectively; p < .001), while pain was less common (65% and 78%, respectively; p < .001). Breakthrough of nausea, anxiety, respiratory secretions, or confusion did not differ. All 6 symptoms, except for confusion, were more often completely relieved in SPC (p = .014 to p < .001 in different comparisons). In SPC, a documented decision about the goal being end-of-life care and information about this were more common than in hospitals (p < .001). Also, to have family members present at the time of death and for family members to be offered a follow-up talk afterward was more common in SPC (p < .001).

CONCLUSION

More systematic palliative care routines may be an important factor for better symptom control and higher quality of end-of-life care in hospitals.

End-of-life care trajectories among older adults with lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

Medicare decedents with cancer often receive intensive care during the last month of life; however, little information exists on longer end-of-life care trajectories.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using SEER-Medicare data, we selected older adults diagnosed with lung cancer between 2008 and 2013 who survived at least six months and died between 2008 and 2014. Each month we assessed claims to assign care categories ordered by intensity as follows: full-month inpatient/skilled nursing facility > cancer-directed therapy (CDT) only > concurrent CDT and symptom management and supportive care services (SMSCS) > SMSCS only > full-month hospice. We assigned each decedent to one of six trajectories: stable hospice, stable SMSCS, stable CDT with or without concurrent SMSCS, decreasing intensity, increasing intensity, and mixed. Multinomial logistic regression estimated associations between socio-demographics, calendar year, and area hospice use rates with end-of-life trajectory.

RESULTS

The sample (N = 24,342) was predominantly aged ≥75 years (59.4%) and non-Hispanic White (80.5%); 19.1% lived in healthcare referral regions where ≤50% of cancer decedents received hospice care. Overall, 6.5% were continuously hospice enrolled, 25.6% received SMSCS only, and 29.4% experienced decreasing intensity; 3.9% received CDT or concurrent care, while 8.7% experienced an increase in intensity. Higher healthcare referral region hospice rates were associated with decreasing end-of-life intensity; Black, non-Hispanic decedents had a higher risk of increasing intensity and mixed patterns.

DISCUSSION

Among older decedents with lung cancer, 62% had six-month end-of-life trajectories indicating low or decreasing intensity, but few received persistent CDT. Demographic characteristics, including race/ethnicity, and contextual measures, including area hospice use patterns, were associated with end-of-life trajectory.

Doing More with the Same: Comparing Public and Private Hospital Palliative Care within California

Background: Public and private hospitals treat different patient populations, which may impact resources to deliver palliative care (PC). Objectives: Compare public and private hospital PC service structures, processes, and treatment outcomes. Design: Retrospective data analysis of the Palliative Care Quality Network between 2018 and 2019. Settings/Subjects: Six public and 40 private California hospitals provided PC consultations to 4244 and 38,354 adults, respectively. Measurements: PC team and patient characteristics, care processes, and treatment outcomes. Results: Public and private hospital PC services had similar full-time equivalent/100 beds (1.2 vs. 1.4, p = 0.4). Public hospital patients were younger (65.2 vs. 73.5, p < 0.001), less likely to be non-Hispanic Caucasian (22.5% vs. 57.5%, p < 0.001), or English speaking (51.1% vs. 79.9%, p < 0.001). Public hospital patients had more moderate/severe pain (21.3% vs. 19.3, p < 0.03), anxiety (12.4% vs. 9.2%, p < 0.001), nausea (6.5% vs. 4.7%, p < 0.001), and dyspnea (11.0% vs. 8.6%, p < 0.001). Both hospitals equally improved pain (70.9% vs. 70.5%, p = 0.83) and nausea (82.0% vs. 87.6%, p = 0.09), but public hospitals were less effective at improving anxiety (67.3% vs. 78.4%, p = 0.002) and dyspnea (58.4% vs. 67.9%, p = 0.05). Although there was no difference in hospital length of stay (public = 10.2 days vs. private = 9.5 days, p = 0.07), public hospitals conducted more patient visits (2.6 vs. 1.8, p < 0.001). They also more often clarified code status (87.7% vs. 84.4%, p < 0.001) and surrogate decision maker (94.9% vs. 89.9%, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Public hospital PC teams treat a more diverse symptomatic population. Yet, they achieved comparable outcomes with similar staffing to private hospitals. These findings have important ramifications for policy makers and public institution leaders.

Key concepts and opportunities

Neuropalliative care is an emerging field dedicated to applying palliative care approaches to meet the needs of persons living with neurologic illness and their families. The development of this field acknowledges the unique needs of this population, including in terms of neuropsychiatric symptoms, the impact of neurologic illness on personhood, and the logistics of managing neurologic disability. In defining the goals of this field, it is important to distinguish between neuropalliative care as an approach to care, as a skillset, as a medical subspecialty, and as a public health goal as each of these constructs offers their own contributions and opportunities. As a newly emerging field, there are nearly unlimited opportunities to improve care through research, clinical care, education, and advocacy.

A point prevalence study of palliative care need and referral rates in adult inpatients

AIM AND OBJECTIVES

To gain an understanding of palliative care need and service utilisation in adult inpatients. The objectives were to 1) Determine the size and characteristics of the population of adult inpatients who were appropriate for palliative care referral, 2) Establish what percentage of patients, who were appropriate for a palliative care referral, had been referred to and/or were receiving palliative care.

BACKGROUND

Internationally there is evidence of high levels of unmet palliative care need. Early access to palliative care is associated with improved outcomes including improved quality of life and reduced healthcare costs.

DESIGN

An observational point prevalence study was reported using the STROBE guidelines.

METHODS

Data were collected directly from inpatient medical records at a 578-bed tertiary private-not-for-profit hospital by three Registered Nurses on 3 June 2021. Palliative care need was assessed using the prognostic criteria for the 12 conditions outlined in the Gold Standards Framework.

RESULTS

A total of 270 inpatients met study inclusion criteria. At a hospital population level, 29% (n = 78) of adult inpatients could have benefitted from palliative care. Of the 78 patients assessed as meeting criteria for palliative care, 29% (n = 23) were currently receiving palliative care with a majority of patients 71% (n = 55) not receiving palliative care.

CONCLUSIONS

This study prospectively collected data and included all 12 conditions outlined in the Gold Standards Framework and found a high level of palliative care need. There was evidence of a high level of unmet palliative care need across conditions and treating specialities.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Estimates of palliative care need can be used to improve access to palliative care and assess operational requirements, including the staffing levels required to meet the level of palliative care need for adult inpatients.