Utility of the NECPAL CCOMS-ICO© tool and the Surprise Question as screening tools for early palliative care and to predict mortality in patients with advanced chronic conditions: A cohort study

Evaluating the Utility of the Surprise Question Among General Physicians for Appropriate Palliative Care Indication in Brazil

Objectives

This study aimed to assess the agreement between established tools, such as the Palliative Performance Scale (PPS) and Brazilian version of the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT-BR), and the subjective assessment of palliative care (PC) need using the Surprise Question (SQ) administered by resident physicians. This assessment was conducted among hospitalized patients, with and without cancer, to determine the efficacy of these tools in indicating the need for PC.

Methods

A six-month cross-sectional study in 2019 of medical records of patients hospitalized in a single center in IAMSPE-Brazil. The SPICT-BR and PPS were applied to the medical record data, and the SQ was posed to each resident physician. Comparisons for categorical data were made using the chi-square test, with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant.

Results

Of 203 patients evaluated, 57.6% were male and 81.2% were older adults (≥60 years). The mean age was 67.40 ± 9.72 years. Chronic disease was nonneoplastic in 78.32% of patients, and 56.65% had not been hospitalized in the preceding year. The PPS score was <70% in 69.4% of patients, and 51.2% met at least one SPICT-BR criterion. Among patients with cancer, 40.9% had over two positive SPICT-BR criteria; 97.5% of these patients received NO responses to SQ by residents (p < 0.0001). Similarly, 90.6% of patients with one SPICT-BR criterion received NO responses to SQ, with no significant difference between groups.

Conclusion

The SQ proved to be a valuable tool for PC indication, particularly when administered by untrained professionals. Consistent with SPICT-BR findings, our study highlights the SQ's role in facilitating early identification of patients in need of PC.

The Surprise Question and clinician-predicted prognosis: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The Surprise Question, 'Would you be surprised if this person died within the next year?' is a simple tool that can be used by clinicians to identify people within the last year of life. This review aimed to determine the accuracy of this assessment, across different healthcare settings, specialties, follow-up periods and respondents.

METHODS

Searches were conducted of Medline, Embase, AMED, PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, from inception until 01 January 2024. Studies were included if they reported original data on the ability of the Surprise Question to predict survival. For each study (including subgroups), sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values and accuracy were determined.

RESULTS

Our dataset comprised 56 distinct cohorts, including 68 829 patients. In a pooled analysis, the sensitivity of the Surprise Question was 0.69 ((0.64 to 0.74) I2=97.2%), specificity 0.69 ((0.63 to 0.74) I2=99.7%), positive predictive value 0.40 ((0.35 to 0.45) I2=99.4%), negative predictive value 0.89 ((0.87 to 0.91) I2=99.7%) and accuracy 0.71 ((0.68 to 0.75) I2=99.3%). The prompt performed best in populations with high event rates, shorter timeframes and when posed to more experienced respondents.

CONCLUSIONS

The Surprise Question demonstrated modest accuracy with considerable heterogeneity across the population to which it was applied and to whom it was posed. Prospective studies should test whether the prompt can facilitate timely access to palliative care services, as originally envisioned.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD32022298236.

Increase in hospital care at the end of life: Retrospective analysis of the last 20 years of life of a cohort of patients

BACKGROUND

There is an increasing need for end-of-life care due to society's progressive aging. This study aimed to describe how hospitalizations evolve long-term and in the last months life of a cohort of deceased patients.

METHODS

The study population were those who died in one year who lived in a district in southern Spain. The number of hospital stays over the previous 20 years and number of contacts with the emergency department, hospitalization, outpatient clinics, and medical day hospital in the last three months of life were determined. The analyses were stratified by age, sex, and pattern of functional decline.

RESULTS

The study population included 1773 patients (82.5% of all who died in the district). The hospital stays during the last 20 years of life were concentrated in the last five years (66%) and specially in the last six months (32%). Eighty percent had contact with the hospital during their last three months of life. The older group had the minimun of stays over the last 20 years and contacts with the hospital in the last months of life.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of hospitalizations occur at the end of life and these admissions represent a significant part of an acute-care hospital's activity. The progressive prolongation of life does not have to go necessarily along with a proportional increase in hospital stays.

Screening for Palliative Care Need in Oncology: Validation of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures

CONTEXT

Leading oncology societies recommend monitoring symptoms and support needs through patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), but their use for assessing specialist palliative care (SPC) need has not yet been explored. Research on SPC integration has focused on staff-assessed screening tools, which are time-consuming.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess the diagnostic validity of the Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale (IPOS) and NCCN Distress Thermometer (NCCN DT) in identifying need for SPC in patients with incurable cancer.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional study, patients with incurable cancer (prognosis <2 years) completed PROMs. In an independent process, the palliative care consultation service (PCCS) assessed the need for SPC in each patient through multiprofessional case review, and this was used as the reference standard. ROC analyses were employed to determine diagnostic validity.

RESULTS

Of the 208 participants, 71 (34.1 %) were classified as having SPC need by the PCCS. Aiming for a minimum sensitivity of 80%, a cut-off of ≥2 items with high/very high burden in the IPOS resulted in a 90.2% sensitivity (specificity = 50; AUC = 0.791; CI 95%= 0.724-0.858). A cut-off of ≥5 resulted in a sensitivity of 80 % for NCCN DT (specificity = 49.5 %; AUC = 0.687; CI 95% = 0.596-0.777).

CONCLUSION

PROMs are useful for identifying SPC need in cancer patients. Their implementation might facilitate timely integration of SPC. Future research should focus on an integrated assessment approach with PROMs that combines the requirements of the different specialties to save patient and staff resources.

Prognostic Role of NECPAL CCOMS-ICO Tool on One-Year Mortality in a Hospitalized Older Population

Background: It is essential to establish both the appropriateness of palliative care (PC) and the prognosis in daily clinical practice to guide decision making in the management of older people with multiple advanced chronic diseases. Objectives: We assessed patients who were appropriate for PC using the NECPAL tool in a hospitalized older population and then we investigated its predictive validity on one-year mortality compared with the multidimensional prognostic index (MPI), a validated geriatric prognostic tool. Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting/Subjects: We enrolled 103 older adults hospitalized for acute medical and surgical conditions in a geriatric hospital in Italy. Measurements: The variables of interest were obtained at baseline through interviews of the ward medical staff and by consulting the computerized medical records. Long-term mortality (one-year) was assessed through the analysis of data acquired from hospital or territorial databases or through telephone contact with caregivers. Results: Mean age was 86.8 ± 7.2 years, with a female prevalence of 54.4%. Prevalence of NECPAL+ patients was 65.1%. MPI low risk: 30.1%; moderate risk: 41.7%; severe risk: 28.2%. Patients deceased during follow-up were 54.4%. NECPAL+ patients were more likely to die, even after adjusting for age, sex, and MPI score (hazard ratio [HR] 2.7, p = 0.020). All the NECPAL categories were associated with one-year mortality. MPI showed a better predictive power than NECPAL (area under the curve [AUC] 0.85 vs. 0.75, p = 0.030). After the exclusion of "Comorbidity: ≥2 concurrent diseases" item from NECPAL, its AUC increased to 0.78 with no statistically significant differences from MPI (p = 0.122). Conclusions: NECPAL is useful to identify the appropriateness of PC in hospitalized older adults, also allowing to predict long-term mortality with a performance similar to that of a validated geriatric prognostic tool.

Would you be surprised? Prospective multicenter study of the Surprise Question as a screening tool to predict mortality in trauma patients

BACKGROUND

The Surprise Question (SQ) ("Would I be surprised if the patient died within the next year?") is a validated tool used to identify patients with limited life expectancy. Because it may have potential to expedite palliative care interventions per American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program Palliative Care Best Practices Guidelines, we sought to determine if trauma team members could use the SQ to accurately predict 1-year mortality in trauma patients.

METHODS

A multicenter, prospective, cohort study collected data (August 2020 to February 2021) on trauma team members' responses to the SQ at 24 hours from admission. One-year mortality was obtained via social security death index records. Positive/negative predictive values and accuracy were calculated overall, by provider role and by patient age.

RESULTS

Ten Level I/II centers enrolled 1,172 patients (87.9% blunt). The median age was 57 years (interquartile range, 36-74 years), and the median Injury Severity Score was 10 (interquartile range, 5-14 years). Overall 1-year mortality was 13.3%. Positive predictive value was low (30.5%) regardless of role. Mortality prediction minimally improved as age increased (positive predictive value highest between 65 and 74 years old, 34.5%) but consistently trended to overprediction of death, even in younger patients.

CONCLUSION

Trauma team members' ability to forecast 1-year mortality using the SQ at 24 hours appears limited perhaps because of overestimation of injury effects, preinjury conditions, and/or team bias. This has implications for the Trauma Quality Improvement Program Guidelines and suggests that more research is needed to determine the optimal time to screen trauma patients with the SQ.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.

Screening instruments for early identification of unmet palliative care needs: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The early detection of individuals who require palliative care is essential for the timely initiation of palliative care services. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to (1) Identify the screening instruments used by health professionals to promote early identification of patients who may benefit from palliative care; and (2) Assess the psychometric properties and clinical performance of the instruments.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, CNKI and Wanfang from inception to May 2023. We used the COnsensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement INstruments to assess the methodological quality of the development process for the instruments. The clinical performance of the instruments was assessed by narrative summary or meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses were conducted where necessary. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias assessment tool.

RESULTS

We included 31 studies that involved seven instruments. Thirteen studies reported the development and validation process of these instruments and 18 studies related to assessment of clinical performance of these instruments. The content validity of the instruments was doubtful or inadequate because of very low to moderate quality evidence. The pooled sensitivity (Se) ranged from 60.0% to 73.8%, with high heterogeneity (I2 of 88.15% to 99.36%). The pooled specificity (Sp) ranges from 70.4% to 90.2%, with high heterogeneity (I2 of 96.81% to 99.94%). The Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT) had better performance in hospitals than in general practice settings (Se=79.8% vs 45.3%, p=0.004; Sp=59.1% vs 97.0%, p=0.000).

CONCLUSION

The clinical performance of existing instruments in identifying patients with palliative care needs early ranged from poor to reasonable. The SPICT is used most commonly, has better clinical performance than other instruments but performs better in hospital settings than in general practice settings.

Interrater agreement of multi-professional case review as reference standard for specialist palliative care need: a mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

A wide variety of screening tools for the need for specialist palliative care (SPC) have been proposed for the use in oncology. However, as there is no established reference standard for SPC need to compare their results with, their sensitivity and specificity have not yet been determined. The aim of the study was to explore whether SPC need assessment by means of multi-professional case review has sufficient interrater agreement to be employed as a reference standard.

METHODS

Comprehensive case descriptions were prepared for 20 inpatients with advanced oncologic disease at the University Hospital Freiburg (Germany). All cases were presented to the palliative care teams of three different hospitals in independent, multi-professional case review sessions. The teams assessed whether patients had support needs in nine categories and subsequently concluded SPC need (yes / no). Interrater agreement regarding SPC need was determined by calculating Fleiss' Kappa.

RESULTS

In 17 out of 20 cases the three teams agreed regarding their appraisal of SPC need (substantial interrater agreement: Fleiss' Kappa κ = 0.80 (95% CI: 0.55-1.0; p < 0.001)). The number of support needs was significantly lower for patients who all teams agreed had no SPC need than for those with agreed SPC need.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed expert case review process shows sufficient reliability to be used as a reference standard. Key elements of the case review process (e.g. clear definition of SPC need, standardized review of the patients' support needs) and possible modifications to simplify the process are discussed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00021686, registered 17.12.2020.

The prognostic value of the NECPAL instrument, Palliative Prognostic Index, and PROFUND index in elderly residents of nursing homes with advanced chronic condition

BACKGROUND

It is essential to assess the need for palliative care and the life prognosis of elderly nursing home residents with an advanced chronic condition, and the NECPAL ICO-CCOMS©4.0 prognostic instrument may be adequate for both purposes. The objective of this study was to examine the predictive capacity of NECPAL, the Palliative Prognosis Index, and the PROFUND index in elderly residents with advanced chronic condition with and without dementia, comparing their results at different time points.

METHODS

This prospective observational study was undertaken in eight nursing homes, following the survival of 146 residents with advanced chronic condition (46.6% with dementia) at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. The capacity of the three instruments to predict mortality was evaluated by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), with 95% confidence interval, for the global population and separately for residents with and without dementia.

RESULTS

The mean age of residents was 84.63 years (± 8.989 yrs); 67.8% were female. The highest predictive capacity was found for PROFUND at 3 months (95%CI: 0.526-0.756; p = 0.016), for PROFUND and NECPAL at 12 months (non-significant; AUC > 0.5), and NECPAL at 24 months (close-to-significant (AUC = 0.624; 95% CI: 0.499-0.750; p = 0.053). The highest capacity at 12 months was obtained using PROFUND in residents with dementia (AUC = 0.698; 95%CI: 0.566-0.829; p = 0.003) and NECPAL in residents without dementia (non-significant; AUC = 0.649; 95%CI: 0.432-0.867; p = 0.178). Significant differences in AUC values were observed between PROFUND at 12 (p = 0.017) and 24 (p = 0.028) months.

CONCLUSIONS

PROFUND offers the most accurate prediction of survival in elderly care home residents with advanced chronic condition overall and in those with dementia, especially over the short term, whereas NECPAL ICO-CCOMS©4.0 appears to be the most useful to predict the long-term survival of residents without dementia. These results support early evaluation of the need for palliative care in elderly care home residents with advanced chronic condition.

The caregiver's perspective on end-of-life inpatient palliative care: a qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

Understanding patient and caregiver experience is key to providing person-centered care. The palliative care approach includes holistic assessment and whole-person care at the end of life, that also involves the patient's family and loved ones. The aim of this study was to describe the way that family caregivers experienced patients' deaths during their loved ones' last hospital admission, comparing inpatient palliative care (PCU) and non-palliative care (Non-PCU) units.

METHODS

A qualitative case study approach was implemented. Family caregivers of terminally ill patients admitted to the Infanta Elena Hospital (Madrid, Spain) between 2016 and 2018 were included using purposeful sampling. Eligible caregivers were first-degree relatives or spouses present during the patient's last hospital admission. Data were collected via in-depth interviews and researchers' field notes. Semi-structured interviews with a question guide were used. A thematic inductive analysis was performed. The group of caregivers of patients admitted to the PCU unit and the group of caregivers of patients admitted to Non-PCU were analyzed separately, through a matrix.

RESULTS

In total 24 caregivers (12 from the PCU and 12 from Non-PCU units) were included. Two main themes were identified: caregivers' perception of scientific and technical appropriateness of care, and perception of person-centred care. Scientific appropriateness of care was subdivided into two categories: diagnostic tests and treatment, and symptom control. Perception of person-centred care was subdivided as: communication, emotional support, and facilitating the farewell process. Caregivers of patients admitted to a PCU unit described their experience of end-of-life care as positive, while their Non-PCU unit counterparts described largely negative experiences.

CONCLUSIONS

PCU provides a person-centered approach to care at the end of life, optimizing treatment for patients with advanced disease, ensuring effective communication, establishing a satisfactory professional relationship with both patients and their loved ones, and facilitating the farewell process for family caregivers.

A Systematic Approach to Assessing and Addressing Palliative Care Needs in an Outpatient Population

CONTEXT/OBJECTIVES

A critical frontier for palliative medicine is to develop systems to routinely and equitably address the palliative care (PC) needs of seriously ill populations.

METHODS

An automated screen identified Medicare primary care patients who had serious illness based on diagnosis codes and utilization patterns. A stepped-wedge design was used to evaluate a six-month intervention through which a healthcare navigator assessed these seriously ill patients and their care partners for PC needs in the domains of 1) physical symptoms, 2) emotional distress, 3) practical concerns, and 4) advance care planning (ACP) via telephone surveys. Identified needs were addressed with tailored PC interventions.

RESULTS

A total of 292/2175 (13.4%) patients screened positive for serious illness. A total of 145 completed an intervention phase; 83 completed a control phase. Severe physical symptoms were identified in 27.6%, emotional distress in 57.2%, practical concerns in 37.2%, and ACP needs in 56.6%. Twenty-five intervention patients (17.2%) were referred to specialty PC compared to six control patients (7.2%). Prevalence of ACP notes increased 45.5%-71.7% (p = 0.001) during the intervention and remained stable during the control phase. Quality of life remained stable during the intervention and declined 7.4/10-6.5/10 (P =0.04) during the control phase.

CONCLUSION

Through an innovative program, patients with serious illness were identified from a primary care population, assessed for PC needs, and offered specific services to meet those needs. While some patients were appropriate for specialty PC, even more needs were addressed without specialty PC. The program resulted in increased ACP and preserved quality of life.

Should the Surprise Question be Used as a Prognostic Tool for People With Life-limiting Illnesses?

The surprise question screening tool ("Would I be surprised if this person died within the next 12 months?") was initially developed to identify possible palliative care needs. One controversial topic regarding the surprise question is whether it should be used as a prognostic tool (predicting survival) for patients with life-limiting illnesses. In this "Controversies in Palliative Care" article, three groups of expert clinicians independently answered this question. All experts provide an overview of current literature, practical advice, and opportunities for future research. All experts reported on the inconsistency of the prognostic capabilities of the surprise question. Two of the three expert groups felt that the surprise question should not be used as a prognostic tool due to these inconsistencies. The third expert group felt that the surprise question should be used as a prognostic tool, particularly for shorter time frames. The experts all highlighted that the original rationale for the surprise question was to trigger a further conversation about future treatment and a potential shift in the focus of the care, identifying patients who many benefit from specialist palliative care or advance care planning; however, many clinicians find this discussion a difficult one to initiate. The experts agreed that the benefit of the surprise question comes from its simplicity: a one-question tool that requires no specific information about the patient's condition. More research is needed to better support the application of this tool in routine practice, particularly in noncancer populations.

Palliative care programmes for people with conditions other than cancer in Thailand: a literature review

BACKGROUND

Thailand has few studies on palliative care programmes for people with conditions other than cancer.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review was to investigate and discuss existing studies of palliative care programmes for non-cancer patients in Thailand.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted using CINAHL, PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct and Google Scholar to find research conducted from 2000 to 2020. The search found 29 articles, eight of which met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

The eight articles included in this review were focused on four end-stage renal disease (ESRD) programmes, two congestive heart failure (CHF) programmes, one chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) programme and one stroke programme.

CONCLUSIONS

There have been few studies of existing palliative care programmes for non-cancer patients in Thailand. These programmes were developed for persons with ESRD, CHF, COPD and stroke, whereas none were available for people with dementia. More palliative care programmes are needed for non-cancer patients.

Validity and reliability of the Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale for non-cancer patients

AIM

This study assessed the validity and reliability of the Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale for non-cancer patients.

METHODS

We recruited 223 non-cancer patients receiving palliative care and their healthcare providers (222) across two home care facilities and two hospitals for a cross-sectional study. We assessed the construct validity and known-group validity of the Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale. The weighted kappa and interclass correlation coefficients were assessed to ascertain reliability.

RESULTS

The scale scores were significantly higher for the 'non-stable' group (worsening condition group) measured in the palliative care phase than for the 'stable' group (P < 0.001). Regarding validity, Spearman's correlations between similar items on the Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale and Edmonton Symptom Assessment System ranged from 0.61 to 0.94. Regarding reliability, the weighted kappa coefficients ranged from 0.53 to 0.81 for patients and from 0.58 to 0.90 for healthcare providers. For inter-rater reliability between patients and healthcare providers, the weighted kappa coefficients for each item ranged from 0.03 to 0.42.

CONCLUSION

This study confirmed the validity and reliability of the Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale for non-cancer patients requiring palliative care. However, the inter-rater reliability indicates poor agreement between the assessments of patients and healthcare providers. This highlights the discrepancies between both their assessments and the importance of the patient's assessment. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2023; ••: ••-••.

Development and Implementation of a Real-Time Inpatient Palliative Care Screening Process to Promote Earlier Palliative Care Referrals

Despite the previous development of criteria for palliative screening tools, there remains a lack of validated and practical screening processes for the general hospitalized patient population for everyday clinical use. This quality improvement project's aim was to implement a practical institution-based adult inpatient palliative care screening tool embedded into the electronic medical record with an automated alert process to assist in identifying patients earlier within hospital admission. The project used a preimplementation and postimplementation design and followed the Plan-Do-Study-Act process to measure the effectiveness of the tool and alert process in decreasing time from admission to palliative care referral and impact on referring patterns. During the project period, 1851 palliative care referrals were completed, and minimal difference (0.6%) was noted in the average time from admission to referral preimplementation and postimplementation ( P = .939). There was a 3.7% increase in referrals postimplementation and a shift in referring service patterns ( P = .321). Although the expected outcome of earlier palliative referrals during admissions was not met, the development and implementation of the tool and alert process is a step toward the creation of a standard practical tool for the general hospitalized patient population.

Palliative care in multiple sclerosis

Main target in palliative care (PC) is burden care of patients and their families, with the aim to reduce suffering through the management of symptoms, rehabilitation, psychosocial issues, and spiritual well-being, using a multidisciplinary approach. Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic disease which induces physical and psychosocial symptoms, with a significant impact on the quality of life. As a consequence, despite advances in research in disease-modifying drugs, MS remains a life-limiting disease with symptoms negatively impacting the lives of MS patients and their families. PC has been developed for end-of-life treatment in oncology, being little used in MS. Specific issues in MS, like pain due to spasticity, requires a different approach respect to cancer pain management. Moreover, it is difficult to anticipate life expectancy in people with severe MS, who often need palliative care for a long extended period. PC teams are trained to keep open full and competent lines of communication about symptoms and disease progression, advanced care planning, and end-of-life issues and wishes. Many studies investigated the effects of home-based PC in advanced MS, showing weak evidences about the efficacy of PC versus usual care in MS. However, current evidence does not support or refute the routine use of PC interventions for people with MS.

Barriers to Palliative Care Access in Patients With Intellectual Disability: A Scoping Review

There is limited knowledge about inequalities regarding palliative care access among patients with intellectual disability. The present scoping review aimed to identify the existing barriers that limit access to palliative care (PC) in patients with intellectual disability.

METHODS

We conducted a literature review on publications since 2014 from three databases (MEDLINE, Biomed Central, and Elsevier Scopus), along with hand searches in scientific journals. The review included peer-reviewed studies written in English and Spanish language with quantitative and qualitative study designs. The participants were patients with intellectual disability and health professionals who had worked with them or had experience in palliative care.

RESULTS

22 studies met the selection criteria. The barriers identified were under referral to palliative care, reduced access, communication, and limited knowledge and experience by health professionals.

CONCLUSION

Patients with intellectual disability do not get referred to PC frequently. Health professionals and caregivers do not recognize when it is necessary to make a referral, and they need to improve their communication abilities. Also, health care workers need more training in PC, pain management, anticipation of death, and use of opioids. More research and education on the palliative care needs and care for patients with intellectual disabilities is needed.

Advanced Adrenocortical Carcinoma: From Symptoms Control to Palliative Care

The prognosis of patients with advanced adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC) is often poor: in the case of metastatic disease, five-year survival is reduced. Advanced disease is not a non-curable disease and, in referral centers, the multidisciplinary approach is the standard of care: if a shared decision regarding several treatments is available, including the correct timing for the performance of each one, overall survival is increased. However, many patients with advanced ACC experience severe psychological and physical symptoms secondary to the disease and the cancer treatments. These symptoms, combined with existential issues, debase the quality of the remaining life. Recent strong evidence from cancer research supports the early integration of palliative care principles and skills into the advanced cancer patient's trajectory, even when asymptomatic. A patient with ACC risks quickly suffering from symptoms/effects alongside the disease; therefore, early palliative care, in some cases concurrent with oncological treatment (simultaneous care), is suggested. The aims of this paper are to review current, advanced ACC approaches, highlight appropriate forms of ACC symptom management and suggest when and how palliative care can be incorporated into the ACC standard of care.

End of Life Cost Savings in the Palliative Care Unit Compared to Other Services

CONTEXT

Hospital deaths carry a significant healthcare cost that has been confirmed to be lower when palliative care units (PCUs) are available.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the last admission hospital health care cost of dying in a first-level hospital between the PCU and the rest of the hospital services.

METHODS

A retrospective, comparative, observational study evaluating costs from the payer perspective on treatments and diagnostic-therapeutic tests performed on patients who die in first-level hospital, comparing whether they were treated by the PCU or another unit (Non-PCU). Patients with a mortality risk >2 were included according to the Severity of Illness Index (SOI) and Risk of Mortality (MOR). All cost express in €, median per patient and interquartile range (IQR).

RESULTS

From 1,833 patients who died, 1,389 were included, 442 (31.1%) treated by PCU and 928 (68.9%) Non-PCU. Statistical differences were found for the last admission total cost (€262.8 (€470.1) for PCU versus €515.3 (€980.48) in Non-PCU), daily total cost (€74.27 (€127.4) vs €115.8 (€142.4) Non-PCU). Savings were maintained when the sample was broken down by diagnosis-related group (DRG) and a multivariate analysis was performed to determine how the different patients baseline characteristics between PCU and Non-PCU patients influenced the results obtained.

CONCLUSIONS

Data from this study show that cost is significantly lower when the patients are treated by a PCU during their last hospital stay when they pass away.

Application of a person-centered prescription model improves pharmacotherapeutic indicators and reduces costs associated with pharmacological treatment in hospitalized older patients at the end of life

Objective

This study sought to investigate whether applying an adapted person-centered prescription (PCP) model reduces the total regular medications in older people admitted in a subacute hospital at the end of life (EOL), improving pharmacotherapeutic indicators and reducing the expense associated with pharmacological treatment.

Design

Randomized controlled trial. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05454644).

Setting

A subacute hospital in Basque Country, Spain.

Subjects

Adults ≥65 years (n = 114) who were admitted to a geriatric convalescence unit and required palliative care.

Intervention

The adapted PCP model consisted of a systematic four-step process conducted by geriatricians and clinical pharmacists. Relative to the original model, this adapted model entails a protocol for the tools and assessments to be conducted on people identified as being at the EOL.

Measurements

After applying the adapted PCP model, the mean change in the number of regular drugs, STOPPFrail (Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions in Frail adults with limited life expectancy) criteria, drug burden index (DBI), drug-drug interactions, medication regimen complexity index (MRCI) and 28-days medication cost of chronic prescriptions between admission and discharge was analyzed. All patients were followed for 3 months after hospital discharge to measure the intervention's effectiveness over time on pharmacotherapeutic variables and the cost of chronic medical prescriptions.

Results

The number of regular prescribed medications at baseline was 9.0 ± 3.2 in the intervention group and 8.2 ± 3.5 in the control group. The mean change in the number of regular prescriptions at discharge was -1.74 in the intervention group and -0.07 in the control group (mean difference = 1.67 ± 0.57; p = 0.007). Applying a PCP model reduced all measured criteria compared with pre-admission (p < 0.05). At discharge, the mean change in 28-days medication cost was significantly lower in the intervention group compared with the control group (-34.91€ vs. -0.36€; p < 0.004).

Conclusion

Applying a PCP model improves pharmacotherapeutic indicators and reduces the costs associated with pharmacological treatment in hospitalized geriatric patients at the EOL, continuing for 3 months after hospital discharge. Future studies must investigate continuity in the transition between hospital care and primary care so that these new care models are offered transversally and not in isolation.

Development of a screening tool for the need of specialist palliative care in oncologic inpatients: study protocol for the ScreeningPALL Study

INTRODUCTION

A range of referral criteria and scores have been developed in recent years to help with screening for the need of specialist palliative care (SPC) in advanced, incurable cancer patients. However, referral criteria have not yet been widely implemented in oncology, as they usually need to be revised by physicians or nurses with limited time resources. To develop an easily applicable screening for the need for SPC in incurable cancer inpatients, we aim to (a) test inter-rater reliability of multiprofessional expert opinion as reference standard for SPC need (phase I) and (b) explore the diagnostic validity of selected patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and routine data for the need of SPC (phase II).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Inclusion criteria for patients are metastatic or locally advanced, incurable cancer, ≥18 years of age and informed consent by patient or proxy. (Exclusion criteria: malignant haematological disease as main diagnosis). In phase I, three palliative care consultation teams (PCTs) of three German university hospitals assess the SPC need of 20 patient cases. Fleiss' Kappa will be calculated for inter-rater reliability. In phase II, 208 patients are consecutively recruited in four inpatient oncology wards of Freiburg University Hospital. The PCT will provide assessment of SPC need. As potential referral criteria, patients complete PROMs and a selection of routine data on person, disease and treatment is documented. Logistic regression models and ROC analyses are employed to test their utility in screening for SPC need.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Our findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international scientific meetings and congresses. Ethical approval was granted by the Ethics Committee of Albert-Ludwigs-University Freiburg, Germany (approval no. 20-1103).

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00021686, registered on 17 December 2020.

End-of-Life Care for End-stage Heart Failure Patients

Although recent heart failure (HF) guidelines highlight integrative palliative care, including end-of-life (EOL), appropriate discussing EOL issues can be challenging due to possibility of unexpected deterioration throughout HF trajectory. Open communication and discussions with multidisciplinary team are important for setting patient and family expectations and establishing mutually agreed goals of care based firmly on the patient’s ‘human dignity’ and ‘right to self-determination.’ Especially when quality-of-life outweighs expanding quantity-of-life, transition to EOL care should be considered. Advanced care planning including resuscitation, device deactivation, site for last days, and bereavement support should focus on ensuring a good death, and be reviewed regularly.

Efforts to improve end-of-life (EOL) care have generally been focused on cancer patients, but high-quality EOL care is also important for patients with other serious medical illnesses including heart failure (HF). Recent HF guidelines offer more clinical considerations for palliative care including EOL care than ever before. Because HF patients can experience rapid, unexpected clinical deterioration or sudden death throughout the disease trajectory, choosing an appropriate time to discuss issues such as advance directives or hospice can be challenging in real clinical situations. Therefore, EOL issues should be discussed early. Conversations are important for understanding patient and family expectations and developing mutually agreed goals of care. In particular, high-quality communication with patient and family through a multidisciplinary team is necessary to define patient-centered goals of care and establish treatment based on goals. Control of symptoms such as dyspnea, pain, anxiety/depression, fatigue, nausea, anorexia, and altered mental status throughout the dying process is an important issue that is often overlooked. When quality-of-life outweighs expanding quantity-of-life, the transition to EOL care should be considered. Advanced care planning including resuscitation (i.e., do-not resuscitate order), device deactivation, site for last days and bereavement support for the family should focus on ensuring a good death and be reviewed regularly. It is essential to ensure that treatment for all HF patients incorporates discussions about the overall goals of care and individual patient preferences at both the EOL and sudden changes in health status. In this review, we focus on EOL care for end-stage HF patients.

Palliative Care Needs and Clinical Features Related to Short-Term Mortality in Patients Enrolled in a Heart Failure Unit

(1) Background: Heart failure (HF) is a chronic and complex pathology requiring continuous patient management due to clinical instability, associated comorbidity, and extensive pharmacological treatment. Its unpredictable course makes the advanced stages challenging to recognize and raises the need for palliative care. This study aims to identify palliative care needs in HF patients and describe clinical features related to short-term mortality. (2) Methods: A descriptive, observational, cross-sectional, and retrospective study was carried out in an HF unit of a Spanish tertiary hospital. Patients’ socio-demographic and clinical data were collected from clinical records, and different instruments were used to establish mortality risks and patients’ needs for palliative care. Subsequently, univariate and bivariate descriptive analyses were performed. A binary logistic regression model helped to determine variables that could influence mortality 12 months after admission to the Unit. (3) Results: The studied population, sixty-five percent women, had an average age of 83.27 years. Among other clinical characteristics predominated preserved ejection fraction (pEF) and dyspnea NYHA (New York Heart Association) class II. The most prevalent comorbidities were hypertension and coronary heart disease. Forty-nine percent had a low–intermediate mortality risk in the following year, according to the PROFUND index. The NECPAL CCOMS-ICO© instrument identified subjects who meet the criteria for palliative care. This predictive model identified NECPAL CCOMS-ICO© results, using beta-blockers (BB) or AIIRA (Angiotensin II receptor antagonists) and low glomerular filtration rate (GFR) as explanatory variables of patients’ mortality in the following year. (4) Conclusions: The analysis of the characteristics of the population with HF allows us to identify patients in need of palliative care. The NECPAL CCOMS-ICO© instrument and the PROFUND have helped identify the characteristics of people with HF who would benefit from palliative management.

Palliative Care in Advanced Alzheimer's Disease Dementia: Evaluation of the Answers Given by Caregivers and Physicians to the Accuracy of Surprise Question, as a Prognostic Tool

Introduction: Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia is the sixth leading cause of death in the United States. The surprise question (SQ) "Would you be surprised if this patient were to die within the next 12 months?" was used to identify death-risk patients, who could benefit from palliative care. Objective: To examine the prognostic accuracy of the SQ by physicians and caregivers in outpatients with AD dementia. Methods: This is a longitudinal and prospective study involving 101 patients along 1 year, applying the SAS 9.2 software and adopting a .05 P-value to assess the variables that influenced answers to the accuracy of SQ using the chi-square test. Results: 27 patients (26.7%) died during the follow-up. When caregivers answered the SQ, it presented a 51.8% sensitivity (CI 31.9 - 71.3), a 66.7% negative predictive value (20.7 - 63.6), a 56.2% specificity (CI 29.8 - 80.2), and a 40.9% positive predictive value of (CI 43.0 - 85.4) with a 53.4% accuracy (CI 38.5 - 68.4). When physicians answered, the SQ had an 88.8% sensitivity (CI 70.8 - 97.6), a 40% negative predictive value (CI 5.2 - 85.3), a 12.5% specificity (CI 1.5 - 38.3), a 63.1% positive predictive value (CI 45.9 - 78.1) with a 60.4% accuracy (CI 45.8 - 75). Conclusion: SQ remains a good tool with high sensitivity for the identification of patients with advanced AD dementia when presented to the attending physician for planning palliative advanced care with accuracy of 60.4% and caregivers' accuracy of 53.4%.

The utility of the surprise question: A useful tool for identifying patients nearing the last phase of life? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The surprise question is widely used to identify patients nearing the last phase of life. Potential differences in accuracy between timeframe, patient subgroups and type of healthcare professionals answering the surprise question have been suggested. Recent studies might give new insights.

AIM

To determine the accuracy of the surprise question in predicting death, differentiating by timeframe, patient subgroup and by type of healthcare professional.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science and CINAHL were searched from inception till 22nd January 2021. Studies were eligible if they used the surprise question prospectively and assessed mortality. Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, positive predictive value and c-statistic were calculated.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria, including 88.268 assessments. The meta-analysis resulted in an estimated sensitivity of 71.4% (95% CI [66.3-76.4]) and specificity of 74.0% (95% CI [69.3-78.6]). The negative predictive value varied from 98.0% (95% CI [97.7-98.3]) to 88.6% (95% CI [87.1-90.0]) with a mortality rate of 5% and 25% respectively. The positive predictive value varied from 12.6% (95% CI [11.0-14.2]) with a mortality rate of 5% to 47.8% (95% CI [44.2-51.3]) with a mortality rate of 25%. Seven studies provided detailed information on different healthcare professionals answering the surprise question.

CONCLUSION

We found overall reasonable test characteristics for the surprise question. Additionally, this study showed notable differences in performance within patient subgroups. However, we did not find an indication of notable differences between timeframe and healthcare professionals.

Perfil de pacientes con cronicidad avanzada y necesidades paliativas: un cambio que no llega

Objetivo: estudiar los posibles cambios en el perfil de pacientes con cronicidad avanzada entre dos cohortes en el momento de su inclusión en un equipo de soporte de atención paliativa domiciliaria (ESAPD) en el marco de la implementación de estrategias de cronicidad. Método: estudio observacional retrospectivo con enfoque analítico de pacientes no oncológicos derivados a un ESAPD de la Comunidad de Madrid, divididos en dos cohortes (2014 y 2019) definidas por el momento de inclusión en programa. Las variables principales fueron: tiempo de permanencia en programa (TPP), carga sintomática (CS) y situación funcional (SF). Se recogieron variables sociodemográficas y clínicas. Se comparó globalmente y por sexo el efecto de la cohorte (bruto y ajustado) sobre las variables principales mediante LogRank y Cox para el TPP, t-Student para la CS y SF y Modelo Lineal Generalizado para la SF. Resultados: las cohortes 2014 y 2019 constaron, respectivamente, de 98 y 116 pacientes, 63% y 52% de mujeres, 48% y 35% del ámbito rural y 43% y 27% de institucionalizados, con una media de edad y lugar de fallecimiento similares. En el TPP no se evidenciaron diferencias entre ambas cohortes (p=0,098); el análisis de Cox tampoco mostró asociación (HR = 1,01 [0,75; 1,36]). En la CS no se encontraron diferencias clínicamente relevantes. No se observaron diferencias en la SF una vez ajustada por las variables edad, sexo e institucionalización. Conclusión: no se observaron diferencias en el perfil de pacientes con cronicidad avanzada incluidos en el programa del ESAPD entre los años 2014 y 2019 en el marco de la implementación de estrategias de cronicidad. Palabras clave: cuidados paliativos, Atención Primaria, enfermedad crónica, diagnóstico precoz, anciano frágil.

Perfil de pacientes con cronicidad avanzada y necesidades paliativas: un cambio que no llega

Objetivo: estudiar los posibles cambios en el perfil de pacientes con cronicidad avanzada entre dos cohortes en el momento de su inclusión en un equipo de soporte de atención paliativa domiciliaria (ESAPD) en el marco de la implementación de estrategias de cronicidad. Método: estudio observacional retrospectivo con enfoque analítico de pacientes no oncológicos derivados a un ESAPD de la Comunidad de Madrid, divididos en dos cohortes (2014 y 2019) definidas por el momento de inclusión en programa. Las variables principales fueron: tiempo de permanencia en programa (TPP), carga sintomática (CS) y situación funcional (SF). Se recogieron variables sociodemográficas y clínicas. Se comparó globalmente y por sexo el efecto de la cohorte (bruto y ajustado) sobre las variables principales mediante LogRank y Cox para el TPP, t-Student para la CS y SF y Modelo Lineal Generalizado para la SF. Resultados: las cohortes 2014 y 2019 constaron, respectivamente, de 98 y 116 pacientes, 63% y 52% de mujeres, 48% y 35% del ámbito rural y 43% y 27% de institucionalizados, con una media de edad y lugar de fallecimiento similares. En el TPP no se evidenciaron diferencias entre ambas cohortes (p=0,098); el análisis de Cox tampoco mostró asociación (HR = 1,01 [0,75; 1,36]). En la CS no se encontraron diferencias clínicamente relevantes. No se observaron diferencias en la SF una vez ajustada por las variables edad, sexo e institucionalización. Conclusión: no se observaron diferencias en el perfil de pacientes con cronicidad avanzada incluidos en el programa del ESAPD entre los años 2014 y 2019 en el marco de la implementación de estrategias de cronicidad. Palabras clave: cuidados paliativos, Atención Primaria, enfermedad crónica, diagnóstico precoz, anciano frágil.

Palliative Care for Patients with End-Stage, Non-Oncologic Diseases-A Retrospective Study in Three Public Palliative Care Departments in Northern Italy

Patients with irreversible malignant and non-malignant diseases have comparable mortality rates, symptom burdens, and quality of life issues; however, non-cancer patients seldom receive palliative care (PC) or receive it late in their disease trajectory. To explore the characteristics of non-cancer patients receiving PC in northern Italy, as well as the features and outcomes of their care, we retrospectively analyzed the charts of all non-cancer patients initiating PC regimens during 2019 in three publicly funded PC departments in Italy’s populous Lombardy region. We recorded the baseline variables (including data collected with the NECPAL CCOMS-ICO-derived questionnaire used since 2018 to evaluate all admissions to the region’s PC network), as well as treatment features (setting and duration) and outcomes (including time and setting of death). Of the 2043 patients admitted in 2019, only 12% (243 patients—131 females; mean age 83.5 years) had non-oncological primary diagnoses (mainly dementia [n = 78], heart disease [n = 55], and lung disease [n = 30]). All 243 had Karnofsky performance statuses ≤ 40% (10−20% in 64%); most (82%) were malnourished, 92% had ≥2 comorbidities, and 61% reported 2−3 severe symptoms (pain, dyspnea, and fatigue). Fifteen withdrew or were discharged from the study PCN; the other 228 remained in the PCN and died in hospice (n = 133), at home (n = 9), or after family-requested transfer to an emergency department (n = 1). Most deaths (172/228, 75%) occurred <3 weeks after PC initiation. These findings indicate that the PCN network we studied cares for few patients with life-limiting non-malignant diseases. Those admitted have advanced-stage illness, heavy symptom burdens, low performance statuses, and poor survival. Additional efforts are needed to improve PCN accessibility for non-cancer patients.

A Systematic Review of the Development and Implementation of Needs-Based Palliative Care Tools in Heart Failure and Chronic Respiratory Disease

Background

The impetus to develop and implement tools for non-malignant patient groups is reflected in the increasing number of instruments being developed for heart failure and chronic respiratory diseases. Evidence syntheses of psychometric quality and clinical utility of these tools is required to inform research and clinical practice.

Aims

This systematic review examined palliative care needs tools for people diagnosed with advanced heart failure or chronic respiratory diseases, to determine their: (1) psychometric quality; and (2) acceptability, feasibility and clinical utility when implemented in clinical practice.

Methods

Systematic searches of MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane and PsycINFO from database inception until June 2021 were undertaken. Additionally, the reference lists of included studies were searched for relevant articles. Psychometric properties of identified measures were evaluated against pre-determined and standard criteria.

Results

Eighteen tools met inclusion criteria: 11 were developed to assess unmet patient palliative care needs. Of those, 6 were generic, 4 were developed for heart failure and 1 was developed for interstitial lung disease. Seven tools identified those who may benefit from palliative care and include general and disease-specific indicators. The psychometric qualities of the tools varied. None met all of the accepted criteria for psychometric rigor in heart failure or respiratory disease populations. There is limited implementation of needs assessment tools in practice.

Conclusion

Several tools were identified, however further validation studies in heart failure and respiratory disease populations are required. Rigorous evaluation to determine the impact of adopting a systematic needs-based approach for heart failure and lung disease on the physical and psychosocial outcomes of patients and carers, as well as the economic costs and benefits to the healthcare system, is required.

Operation of a triage committee for advanced life support during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

During the first weeks of March 2020 in Spain, the cases of severe respiratory failure progressively increased, generating an imbalance between the clinical needs for advanced life support (ALS) measures and the effective availability of ALS resources. To address this problem, the creation of triage committees (TC) was proposed, whose main function is to select the best candidates to receive ALS. The main objective of our study is to describe the clinical characteristics of the patients evaluated by the TC of the Alcorcón Foundation University Hospital (AFUH) during the first wave of SARS CoV-2. Other objectives are to determine if there are differences between the patients considered candidates / not candidates for ALS and to analyze the functioning of the TC.

METHODS

Retrospective observational study of all patients assessed by the AFUH TC.

RESULTS

There were 19 meetings, in which 181 patients were evaluated, 65.4% male and with a mean age of 70.1 years. 31% had some degree of functional dependence, the Barthel median was 100 and Charlson 4. 58.5% were not considered a candidate for ALS at that time. The patients considered candidates to receive ALS were younger (72 vs 66; p < 0.001), had less comorbidity (Charlson 4 vs 3; p < 0.001) and had a better previous functional situation. A median of 5 physicians participated in each meeting and, after being assessed by the TC, 13.6% received ALS: 29.3% of those considered candidates for ALS and 2% of the non-candidates.

CONCLUSIONS

The patients evaluated by the TC had a mean age of 70 years, high comorbidity and almost a third had some degree of functional dependence. More than half were not considered candidates for ALS at that time, these patients being older, with more comorbidity and a worse previous functional situation. TC decisions, based on objective clinical criteria, were almost always respected. Public institutions must get involved in triage procedures, which should and in our opinion must include the creation of TC in health centers. The implementation of Anticipated Decision programs (ADP) would help enable patients affected by triage decisions to participate in them.

Palliative and prognostic approach in cancer patients identified in the multicentre NECesidades PALiativas 2 study in Argentina

Background

Early identification of palliative needs has proven benefits in quality of life, survival and decision-making. The NECesidades PALiativas (NECPAL) Centro Coordinador Organización Mundial de la Salud - Instituto Catalán de Oncología (CCOMS-ICO©) tool combines the physician’s insight with objective disease progression parameters and advanced chronic conditions. Some parameters have been independently associated with mortality risk in different populations. According to the concept of the ‘prognostic approach’ as a companion of the ‘palliative approach’, predictive models that identify individuals at high mortality risk are needed.

Objective

We aimed to identify prognostic factors of mortality in cancer in our cultural context.

Method

We assessed cancer patients with palliative needs until death using this validated predictive tool at three hospitals in Buenos Aires City. This multifactorial, quantitative and qualitative non-dichotomous assessment process combines subjective perception (the surprise question: Would you be surprised if this patient dies in the next year?) with other parameters, including the request (and need) for palliative care (PC), the assessment of disease severity, geriatric syndromes, psychosocial factors and comorbidities, as well as the use of healthcare resources.

Results

2,104 cancer patients were identified, 681 were NECPAL+ (32.3%). During a 2-year follow-up period, 422 NECPAL+ patients died (61.9%). The mean overall survival was 8 months. A multivariate model was constructed with significant indicators in univariate analysis. The best predictors of mortality were: nutritional decline (p < 0.000), functional decline (p < 0.000), palliative performance scale (PPS) ≤ 50 (p < 0.000), persistent symptoms (p < 0.002), functional dependence (p < 0.000), poor treatment response (p < 0.000), primary cancer diagnosis (p = 0.024) and condition (in/outpatients) (p < 0.000). Only three variables remained as survival predictors: low response to treatment (p < 0.001), PPS ≤ 50 (p < 0.000) and condition (in/outpatients) (p < 0.000).

Conclusion

This prospective model aimed to improve cancer survival prediction and timely PC referral in Argentinian hospitals.

ID-PALL: An Instrument to Help You Identify Patients in Need of Palliative Care

Palliative care is frequently associated with the end of life and cancer. However, other patients may need palliative care, and this need may be present earlier in the disease trajectory. It is therefore essential to identify at the right time patients who need palliative care and to distinguish between those in need of general palliative care and those for whom a referral to specialists is required. ID-PALL has been developed as an instrument to support professionals in this identification and to discuss a suitable palliative care project, in order to maintain the best quality of life for patients and their relatives. Recommendations for clinical practice are also proposed to guide professionals after the identification phase.

Factors Associated with Medication Non-Adherence among Patients with Multimorbidity and Polypharmacy Admitted to an Intermediate Care Center

Identifying determinants of medication non-adherence in patients with multimorbidity would provide a step forward in developing patient-centered strategies to optimize their care. Medication appropriateness has been proposed to play a major role in medication non-adherence, reinforcing the importance of interdisciplinary medication review. This study examines factors associated with medication non-adherence among older patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. A cross-sectional study of non-institutionalized patients aged ≥65 years with ≥2 chronic conditions and ≥5 long-term medications admitted to an intermediate care center was performed. Ninety-three patients were included (mean age 83.0 ± 6.1 years). The prevalence of non-adherence based on patients' multiple discretized proportion of days covered was 79.6% (n = 74). According to multivariable analyses, individuals with a suboptimal self-report adherence (by using the Spanish-version Adherence to Refills and Medications Scale) were more likely to be non-adherent to medications (OR = 8.99, 95% CI 2.80-28.84, p < 0.001). Having ≥3 potentially inappropriate prescribing (OR = 3.90, 95% CI 0.95-15.99, p = 0.059) was barely below the level of significance. These two factors seem to capture most of the non-adherence determinants identified in bivariate analyses, including medication burden, medication appropriateness and patients' experiences related to medication management. Thus, the relationship between patients' self-reported adherence and medication appropriateness provides a basis to implement targeted strategies to improve effective prescribing in patients with multimorbidity.

Measurement Properties of ID-PALL, A New Instrument for the Identification of Patients With General and Specialized Palliative Care Needs

CONTEXT

To improve access to palliative care, identification of patients in need of general or specialized palliative care is necessary. To our knowledge, no available identification instrument makes this distinction. ID-PALL is a screening instrument developed to differentiate between these patient groups.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the structural and criterion validity and the inter-rater agreement of ID-PALL.

METHODS

In this multicenter, prospective, cross-sectional study, nurses and physicians assessed medical patients hospitalized for 2 to 5 days in two tertiary hospitals in Switzerland using ID-PALL. For the criterion validity, these assessments were compared to a clinical gold standard evaluation performed by palliative care specialists. Structural validity, internal consistency and inter-rater agreement were assessed.

RESULTS

2232 patients were assessed between January and December 2018, 97% by nurses and 50% by physicians. The variances for ID-PALL G and S are explained by two factors, the first one explaining most of the variance in both cases. For ID-PALL G, sensitivity ranged between 0.80 and 0.87 and specificity between 0.56 and 0.59. ID-PALL S sensitivity ranged between 0.82 and 0.94, and specificity between 0.35 and 0.64. A cut-off value of 1 delivered the optimal values for patient identification. Cronbach's alpha was 0.78 for ID-PALL G and 0.67 for ID-PALL S. The agreement rate between nurses and physicians was 71.5% for ID-PALL G and 64.6% for ID-PALL S.

CONCLUSION

ID-PALL is a promising screening instrument allowing the early identification of patients in need of general or specialized palliative care. It can be used by nurses and physicians without a specialized palliative care training. Further testing of the finalized clinical version appears warranted.

Improving medication adherence and effective prescribing through a patient-centered prescription model in patients with multimorbidity

PURPOSE

This study aimed to assess the impact of the patient-centered prescription (PCP) model in medication adherence and effective prescribing in patients with multimorbidity.

METHODS

Uncontrolled before-after study in an intermediate care facility in a mixed urban-rural district. Inpatients aged ≥ 65 years with multimorbidity exposed to polypharmacy before hospital admission were consecutively enrolled. Every patient's treatment plan was analyzed through the PCP model, which includes interventions aimed at improving medication adherence. The primary endpoint was the change in the proportion of adherent patients between pre-admission and after discharge for all regularly scheduled long-term medications, using the proportion of days covered (PDC). Secondary endpoints included the change on mean PDC for all long-term medications, number of long-term medications, proportion of patients with hyperpolypharmacy, medication regimen complexity index (MRCI) score, drug burden index (DBI) score, number of potential inappropriate prescribing (PIP), and proportion of patients with ≥ 2 PIPs.

RESULTS

Ninety-three non-institutionalized patients were included (mean age 83.0 ± SD 6.1 years). The proportion of adherent patients increased from 22.1 to 51.9% (P < 0.001). Intervention also improved mean PDC [mean difference (95% CI) 10.6 (7.7, 13.5)] and effective prescribing through a reduction on the number of long-term medications [- 1.3 (- 1.7, - 0.9)], proportion of patients exposed to hyperpolypharmacy (- 16.1%, P < 0.001), MRCI score [- 2.2 (- 3.4, - 1.0)], DBI score [- 0.16 (- 1.8, - 1.3)], number of PIPs [- 1.6 (- 1.8, - 1.3)], and proportion of patients with ≥ 2 PIPs (- 53.7%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Studied intervention provides significant effective prescribing and medication adherence enhancements in non-institutionalized older patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy.

Facilitating advance care planning in the general practice setting for patients with a chronic, life-limiting illness: protocol for a phase-III cluster-randomized controlled trial and process evaluation of the ACP-GP intervention

Background

Advance care planning (ACP), a process of communication about patients’ preferences for future medical care, should be initiated in a timely manner. Ideally situated for this initiation is the general practitioner (GP). The intervention to improve the initiation of ACP for patients with a chronic life-limiting illness in general practice (ACP-GP) includes an ACP workbook for patients, ACP communication training for GPs, planned ACP conversations, and documentation of ACP conversation outcomes in a structured template. We present the study protocol of a Phase-III randomized controlled trial (RCT) of ACP-GP that aims to evaluate its effects on outcomes at the GP, patient, and surrogate decision maker (SDM) levels; and to assess the implementation process of the intervention.

Methods

This RCT will take place in Flanders, Belgium. Thirty-six GPs, 108 patients with a chronic, life-limiting illness, and their (potential) SDM will be recruited, then cluster-randomized to the ACP-GP intervention or the control condition. The primary outcome for GPs is ACP self-efficacy; primary outcome for patients is level of ACP engagement. Secondary outcomes for GPs are ACP practices, knowledge and attitudes; and documentation of ACP discussion outcomes. Secondary outcomes for patients are quality of life; anxiety; depression; appointment of an SDM; completion of new ACP documents; thinking about ACP; and communication with the GP. The secondary outcome for the SDM is level of engagement with ACP. A process evaluation will assess the recruitment and implementation of the intervention using the RE-AIM framework.

Discussion

While the general practice setting holds promise for timely initiation of ACP, there is a lack of randomized trial studies evaluating the effectiveness of ACP interventions implemented in this setting. After this Phase-III RCT, we will be able to present valuable evidence of the effects of this ACP-GP intervention, with the potential for offering a well-tested and evaluated program to be implemented in general practice. The results of the process evaluation will provide insight into what contributes to or detracts from implementation success, as well as how the intervention can be adapted to specific contexts or needs.

Trial registration

Prospectively registered at with ISRCTN (ISRCTN12995230); registered 19/06/2020.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12904-021-00796-1.

Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool prognostic value in older hospitalised patients: a prospective multicentre study

BACKGROUND

An increasing number of older patients are hospitalised. Prognostic uncertainty causes hospital doctors to be reluctant to make the switch from cure to care. The Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT) has not been validated for prognostication in an older hospitalised population.

AIM

To validate SPICT as a prognostic tool for risk of dying within one year in older hospitalised patients.

DESIGN

Prospective multicentre study. Premorbid SPICT and 1-year survival and survival time were assessed.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Patients 75 years and older admitted at acute geriatric (n=209) and cardiology units (CUs) (n=249) of four hospitals.

RESULTS

In total, 59.3% (124/209) was SPICT identified on acute geriatric vs 40.6% (101/249) on CUs (p<0.001). SPICT-identified patients in CUs reported more functional needs and more symptoms compared to SPICT non-identified patients. On acute geriatric units, SPICT-identified patients reported more functional needs only.The HR of dying was 2.9 (95% CI 1.1 to 8.7) in SPICT-identified versus non-identified after adjustment for hospital strata, age, gender and did not differ between units. One-year mortality was 24% and 22%, respectively, on acute geriatric versus CUs (p=0.488). Pooled average sensitivity, specificity and partial area under the curve differed significantly between acute geriatric and CUs (p<0.001), respectively, 0.82 (95%CI 0.66 to 0.91), 0.49 (95%CI 0.40 to 0.58) and 0.82 in geriatric vs 0.69 (95% CI 0.42 to 0.87), 0.66 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.77) and 0.65 in CUs.

CONCLUSIONS

SPICT may be used as a tool to identify older hospitalised patients at risk of dying within 1 year and who may benefit from a palliative care approach including advance care planning. The prognostic accuracy of SPICT is better in older patients admitted at the acute geriatric versus the CU.

Early Palliative Care Is Associated With Reduced Emergency Department Utilization in Pancreatic Cancer

OBJECTIVES

Most patients with pancreatic cancer have high symptom burden and poor outcomes. Palliative care (PC) can improve the quality of care through expert symptom management, although the optimal timing of PC referral is still poorly understood. We aimed to assess the association of early PC on health care utilization and charges of care for pancreatic cancer patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We selected patients with pancreatic cancer diagnosed between 2000 and 2009 who received at least 1 PC encounter using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare. Patients who had unknown follow-up were excluded. We defined "early PC" if the patients received PC within 30 days of diagnosis.

RESULTS

A total of 3166 patients had a PC encounter; 28% had an early PC. Patients receiving early PC were more likely to be female and have older age compared with patients receiving late PC (P<0.001). Patients receiving early PC had fewer emergency department (ED) visits (2.6 vs. 3.0 visits, P=0.004) and lower total charges of ED care ($3158 vs. $3981, P<0.001) compared with patients receiving late PC. Patients receiving early PC also had lower intensive care unit admissions (0.82 vs. 0.98 visits, P=0.006) and total charges of intensive care unit care ($14,466 vs. $18,687, P=0.01). On multivariable analysis, patients receiving early PC were significantly associated with fewer ED visits (P=0.007) and lower charges of ED care (P=0.018) for all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Early PC referrals were associated with lower ED visits and ED-related charges. Our findings support oncology society guideline recommendations for early PC in patients with advanced malignancies such as pancreatic cancer.

Clustering Complex Chronic Patients: A Cross-Sectional Community Study From the General Practitioner's Perspective

Objective:

Characterize subgroups of Complex Chronic Patients (CCPs) with cluster analysis from the general practitioner’s perspective.

Study design:

Cross-sectional population-based study.

Setting:

Three Primary Care urban centres for a reference population of 43,647 inhabitants over 14 years old in Sabadell, Catalonia, Spain.

Methods:

Complexity is defined by the independent clinical judgment of general practitioners with the aid of complexity domains (both clinical and social). We used a Two-Step Cluster method to identify relevant subgroups of CCPs.

Results:

Three relevant subgroups were identified. The first one was mainly managed by primary care professionals, and 63% of its CCPs belonged to the high-risk stratum of the Adjusted Morbidity Groups (GMA). The second subgroup included younger patients than the other two clusters, and showed the highest ratios of social deprivation and severe mental disease; 48% of its CCPs belonged to the high-risk stratum of the GMA. A third cluster included patients who belonged to the high-risk stratum of the GMA. Their age was similar to that of the patients in the first cluster, but they showed the highest values in the following areas: (i) risk of admission; (ii) proportion of advanced chronic disease and limited-life prognosis; (iii) functional loss and (iv) geriatric syndromes, along with special uncertainty in decision-making and clinical management.

Conclusions:

Characterization of CCPs shows clearly distinct profiles of needs, which provides an improved epidemiological picture by identifying clusters of patients who are likely to benefit from targeted interventions.

A New Approach to the Identification of Palliative Care Needs and Advanced Chronic Patients among Nursing Home Residents

Background: Proper planning of Palliative Care in nursing homes requires advanced knowledge of the care needs that residents show. The aim of the study was to evaluate Palliative Needs and other conditions such as fragility, complexity, and prognosis and also to suggest new indicators for the establishment of the resident’s advanced chronic condition. Methods: Cross-sectional study conducted in 149 nursing homes Complex Chronic residents evaluated by trained professionals. Palliative Care Needs, assessed by the NECPAL ICO-CCOMS© tool, and fragility, case and palliative complexity and prognosis were evaluate through a comprehensive assessment. Descriptive analyses and association measures were performed setting the statistical significance at 0.05. Results: More than 50% of the residents had positive Surprise Question and other Palliative Needs and were classified as Advanced Chronic Patients. Distress and/or Severe Adaptative Disorder was the most frequent need shown by the residents and significant differences in levels of frailty and other characteristics, were found between the Positive and the Negative Surprise Question Groups. Statistically significant correlations were also found between aspects of both groups. Conclusions: Nursing homes residents show Palliative Needs regardless of the response to the Surprise Question of the NECPAL tool. Other characteristics such as presence of an intermediate level of frailty are suggested as a new perspective to identify advanced chronic patients among nursing homes residents.

[Adaptation and validation in Chile of the patient identification instrument needing palliative care: NECPAL-CCOMS-ICO 3.1©]

OBJECTIVE

Adapt and validate the NECPAL instrument in Chile.

DESIGN

Prospective, longitudinal, analytical study for validation of the instrument in 5 stages: cultural adaptation, content validation, pilot test, application, and statistical analysis.

PLACE

Four primary care centers of the South East Metropolitan Health Service, in Santiago, Chile.

PARTICIPANTS

Primary health care physicians and nurses for cultural adaptation and application, and palliative care experts for content validation.

MAIN MEASUREMENTS

Cultural adaptation was carried out through cognitive interviews. Content validity was measured using Delphi method and the Lawshe content validity ratio (CVR) was obtained. In the pilot test, we measured stability (test-retest), inter judge harmony and application time in 14 chronic advanced patients (CAP). The test was applied to this same group, calculating the sample according to Nunally's recommendation.

RESULTS

A sample of 118 CAP was obtained. The CVR was 0.75 and the average testing time was 6.7 min (SD = 4.01). The test-retest obtained a Kappa test concordance index between 0.632 and 1.0; and the interjudge harmony agreement between 0.192 and 0.692. The surprise question (PS) was positive in 20.3% of the sample. The main conditions associated with the disease-specific severity item, were fragility (23.7%), chronic heart disease (21.2%) and chronic lung disease (12.7%). The demand group and specific severity indicators obtained a greater predictive capacity of PS+, with an area under the curve of 0.808 (95% CI: 0.697-0.918).

CONCLUSIONS

NECPAL is feasible to be used in Chile, has adequate psychometric properties and will allow early detection of patients in need of palliative care.

NECPAL prognostic tool: a palliative medicine retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To develop and validate a prognostic model to assess mortality risk at 24 months in patients with advanced chronic conditions.

METHODS

Retrospective design based on a previous population cohort study with 789 adults who were identified with the surprise question and NECPAL tool from primary and intermediate care centres, nursing homes and one acute hospital of Spain. A Cox regression model was used to derive a mortality predictive model based on patients' age and six previously selected NECPAL prognostic factors (palliative care need identified by healthcare professionals, functional decline, nutritional decline, multimorbidity, use of resources, disease-specific criteria of severity/progression). Patients were split into derivation/validation cohorts, and four steps were followed: descriptive analysis, predictors' assessment, model estimation and model assessment.

RESULTS

All predictive variables were independently associated with increased risk of mortality at 24 months. Performance model including age was good; discrimination power by area under the curve (AUC) was 0.72/0.67 in the derivation/validation cohorts, and correlation between expected and observed (E/O) mortality ratio was 0.74/0.70. The model showed similar performance across settings (AUC 0.65-0.74, E/O 1.00-1.01), the best performance in oncological patients (AUC 0.78, E/O 0.76) and the worst in dementia patients (AUC 0.58, E/O 0.85). Based on the number of factors affected, three prognostic stages with significant differences and a median survival of 38, 17.2 and 3.6 months (p<0.001) were defined.

CONCLUSION

The NECPAL prognostic tool is accurate and eventually useful at the clinical practice. Stratification in risk groups may enable early intervention and enhance policy-making and service planning.