Comparing functional decline and distress from symptoms in people with thoracic life-limiting illnesses: lung cancers and non-malignant end-stage respiratory diseases

Creating more comparable cohorts in observational palliative care studies: A proposed framework to improve applicability and replicability of research

BACKGROUND

Palliative care is characterised by heterogeneous patient and caregiver populations who are provided care in different health systems and a research base including a large proportion of observational, mostly retrospective studies. The inherent diversity of palliative care populations and the often inadequate study descriptions challenge the application of new knowledge into practice and reproducibility for confirmatory studies. Being able to define systematically study populations would significantly increase their generalisability and effective translation into practice.

PROPOSAL

Based on an informal consensus process by active palliative care researchers challenged by this problem and a review of the current evidence, we propose an approach to creating more comparable cohorts in observational (non-randomised) palliative care studies that relies on defining the study population in relation to a fixed, well-defined event from which analyses are built ('anchoring'). In addition to providing a detailed and complete description of the study population, anchoring is the critical step in creating more comparable cohorts in observational palliative care studies. Anchoring can be done with respect to a single or multiple data points, and can support both prospective and retrospective data collection and analysis.

DISCUSSION

Anchoring the cohort to reproducible data points will help create more comparable cohorts in palliative care whilst mitigating its inherent heterogeneity. This, in turn, will help optimise the generalisability, applicability and reproducibility of observational palliative care studies to strengthen the evidence base and improve practice.

The effect of an integrated palliative care intervention on quality of life and acute healthcare use in patients with COPD: Results of the COMPASSION cluster randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

COPD causes high morbidity and mortality, emphasizing the need for palliative care.

AIM

To assess the effectiveness of palliative care in patients with COPD.

DESIGN

Cluster randomized controlled trial (COMPASSION study; Netherlands Trial Register (NTR): NL7644, 07-04-2019). Healthcare providers within the intervention group were trained to implement palliative care components into routine COPD care. Patients completed questionnaires at baseline, after 3 and 6 months; medical records were assessed after 12 months. The primary outcome was quality of life (FACIT-Pal). Secondary outcomes were anxiety, depression, spiritual well-being, satisfaction with care, acute healthcare use, documentation of life-sustaining treatment preferences and place of death. Generalized linear mixed modelling was used for analyses.

SETTING

Eight hospital regions in the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients hospitalized for an acute exacerbation of COPD and positive ProPal-COPD score.

RESULTS

Of 222 patients included, 106 responded to the questionnaire at 6 months. Thirty-six of 98 intervention patients (36.7%) received the intervention. Intention-to-treat-analysis showed no effect on the primary outcome (adjusted difference: 1.09; 95% confidence interval: -5.44 to 7.60). In the intervention group, fewer intensive care admissions for COPD took place (adjusted odds ratio: 0.21; 95% confidence interval: 0.03-0.81) and strong indications were found for fewer hospitalizations (adjusted incidence rate ratio: 0.69; 95% confidence interval: 0.46-1.03).

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence that palliative care improves quality of life in patients with COPD. However, it can potentially reduce acute healthcare use. The consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic led to suboptimal implementation and insufficient power, and may have affected some of our findings.

Decision and Practice of End-of-Life Care in Lung Disease Patients with Physicians Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to analyze end-of-life care practices in lung disease patients with physician orders for life-sustaining treatment (POLSTs).

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed data from medical records regarding the end-of-life care practices of POLST decisions for patients with lung disease hospitalized at a tertiary hospital in Seoul, South Korea. Data were collected from January 1 to June 30, 2021.

Results

Of 300 total patients, 198 had lung cancer (66.0%) and 102 had non-malignant lung diseases (34.0%). A POLST was written for 187 patients (62.3%), and an advance directive was written for 20 patients (6.7%). Subsequent treatments were hemodialysis in 13 patients (4.3%), surgery in 3 patients (1.0%), and cardiopulmonary cerebral resuscitation in 1 patient (0.3%). Among cancer patients, chemotherapy was performed in 11 patients (3.7%), targeted therapy in 11 patients (3.7%), immunotherapy in 6 patients (2.0%), and radiation therapy in 13 patients (4.3%). Depending on the type of lung disease, types of treatment differed, including hemodialysis, ventilators, bilevel positive airway pressure, high-flow nasal cannulas, nebulizers, enteral nutrition, central line, inotropic agents, and opioids.

Conclusion

Although the goals of hospice care are the same whether a patient has lung cancer or a non-malignant lung disease, because the characteristics of the respective diseases differ, end-of-life care practices and hospice approaches must be considered differently.