Palliative care for people with advanced liver disease: A feasibility trial of a supportive care liver nurse specialist

Association Between Quality of Life Defined by EuroQol Group 5 Dimension and Composite Inferior Outcome Among Inpatients with Cirrhosis

Purpose

The utility of the EuroQol Group 5 Dimension (EQ-5D) measuring health-related quality of life (HRQoL) has been verified; however, knowledge gaps remain concerning predictive performance in cirrhosis. We aimed to identify the optimal threshold for risk stratification and the pronounced domain in the EQ-5D linked to inferior outcomes.

Patients and Methods

The X-tile project was used to obtain a threshold, considering the composite outcome of 1-year all-cause mortality or readmission. A restricted cubic spline (RCS) was performed to test the non-linear relationship between the EQ-5D utility value and the primary outcome. Six multivariate Cox regression models incorporating EQ-5D utility value and each of the five domains were constructed.

Setting/Participants

Totally, 420 patients with cirrhosis were recruited.

Results

The median utility value of the study population was 0.77 and 59.8% reported impairment in minimal one EQ-5D domain. RCS indicated a linear relationship between the utility value and composite inferior outcome. X-tile pinpointed a utility value of 0.59 stratifying populations into high- and low-risk groups based on the outcome. Inpatients with cirrhosis and deteriorated HRQoL (utility value ≤0.59) were at higher risk of death or readmission (adjusted HR: 2.18, P < 0.001). Furthermore, mobility and usual activities were the most pronounced domains associated with composite inferior outcome.

Conclusion

A utility value ≤0.59 can identify cirrhotic inpatients exhibiting compromised HRQoL and mortality/readmission risk. It is tempting to reverse the decreased HRQoL by applying longitudinal measurements and keeping surveillance on utility value, while interventions appear to mainly focus on improving mobility and usual activities.

The experiences of people with liver disease of palliative and end-of-life care in the United Kingdom-A systematic literature review and metasynthesis

BACKGROUND

Liver disease is a growing health concern and a major cause of death. It causes multiple symptoms, including financial, psychological and social issues. To address these challenges, palliative care can support people alongside active treatment, and towards the end of life, but little is known about the care experiences of individuals with liver disease in the United Kingdom. This review aimed to explore the palliative and end-of-life care experiences of people with liver disease in the United Kingdom.

METHOD

A systematic review was conducted using a five-stage process and following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses guidelines. Searches were across Web of Science, Scopus, EBSCO and grey literature until 10 May 2023. The review was registered through International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). NVivo 12.5 was used to facilitate data analysis (systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42022382649).

RESULTS

Of 6035 papers (excluding duplicates) found from searches, five met the inclusion criteria of primary research related to adults with liver disease receiving palliative and/or end-of-life care in the United Kingdom, published in English. Reflexive thematic analysis of the data was conducted. The themes identified were the experiences of people with liver disease of relating to healthcare professionals, using services, receiving support, and experiences of information and communication. These were connected by an overarching concept of disempowerment versus empowerment, with the notion of person-centred care as an important feature.

CONCLUSION

This review has found variations in the care experiences of people with advanced liver disease towards the end of life and an overall lack of access to specialist palliative care services. Where services are designed to be person-centred, experiences are more empowering. Further research is needed but with recognition that it is often unclear when care for people with liver disease is palliative or end-of-life.

PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

An online public involvement workshop was held on 18 April 2023 through Voice (2023). This included four people with liver disease and four carers to discuss the review findings and to design a qualitative research study to further explore the topic.

Patient-reported symptoms and interest in symptom monitoring in HCC treated with locoregional therapies: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures relevant to domains most important to patients with HCC who received locoregional therapies are needed to advance patient-centered research. Furthermore, electronic PRO monitoring in clinical care has been shown to reduce hospitalizations and deaths in patients with other cancers. We conducted a qualitative study among patients with HCC who recently received locoregional therapies to (1) identify common and distressing posttreatment symptoms to prioritize PRO domain selection and (2) gauge interest in an electronic PRO symptom monitoring system.

METHODS

We performed semi-structured telephone interviews among adult patients who received locoregional therapies (median of 26 days after treatment) for treatment-naïve HCC at a single tertiary care center. Interviews were conducted until thematic saturation was reached. Qualitative content analysis was conducted to identify emerging themes and sub-themes.

RESULTS

Ten of 26 patients (38%) reported at least 1 symptom before treatment. In contrast, all participants (n = 26) with recently treated HCC reported at least 1 posttreatment physical symptom, with the most common being appetite loss (73%), fatigue (58%), abdominal pain (46%), and nausea (35%). Most participants (77%) stated they saw potential benefits in posttreatment ePRO symptom monitoring.

CONCLUSIONS

Posttreatment symptoms after HCC locoregional therapies are common and often severe. These data can inform and prioritize PRO domain selection. Patients are interested in ePRO monitoring to monitor and proactively address posttreatment symptoms. Given the clinical benefits in patients with metastatic cancers, ePRO monitoring warrants investigation in patients with HCC.

Improving palliative and supportive care in advanced cirrhosis: the HepatoCare model of integrated collaborative care

BACKGROUND

Patients with advanced cirrhosis experience an unpredictable disease trajectory but are infrequently referred to palliative care (PC) services and rarely undertake advance care planning (ACP).

AIM

We assessed whether a novel model of care increased provision of meaningful PC in advanced cirrhosis compared with standard of care (SOC).

METHODS

Thirty consecutive hepatology clinic outpatients with advanced cirrhosis, meeting one or more cirrhosis-related PC referral criteria, consented to treatment in the HepatoCare clinic (PC physician, specialist liver nurse, pharmacist) in parallel with usual specialist hepatology care. A control cohort of 30 consecutive outpatients with advanced cirrhosis undergoing SOC treatment was retrospectively identified for comparison. The primary outcome was provision of meaningful PC using HepatoCare versus SOC. Additional clinical outcomes were assessed over 12 months or until death and significant differences were identified.

RESULTS

The intervention and control cohorts had similarly advanced cirrhosis (mean Child-Pugh scores 8.7 vs 8.2, P = 0.46; mean model for end-stage liver disease scores 14.4 vs 14.6, P = 0.88) but a lower 12-month mortality rate (33% HepatoCare vs 67% SOC; P = 0.02). The intervention cohort experienced higher uptake of formal ACP (100% vs 25% for the control cohort) and outpatient PC referral (100% vs 40%), and were more likely to die at home or in a PC bed/hospice (80% vs 30%). The majority of the HepatoCare cohort (81%) had medications safely deprescribed and experienced fewer unplanned admission days (470 vs 794).

CONCLUSIONS

HepatoCare is a novel multidisciplinary model of care that integrates effective PC and specialist hepatology management to improve outcomes in advanced cirrhosis.

Palliative clinical trials in advanced chronic liver disease: Challenges and opportunities

Patients with advanced chronic liver disease have a complex symptom burden and many are not candidates for curative therapy. Despite this, provision of palliative interventions remains woefully inadequate, with an insufficient evidence base being a contributory factor. Designing and conducting palliative interventional trials in advanced chronic liver disease remains challenging for a multitude of reasons. In this manuscript we review past and ongoing palliative interventional trials. We identify barriers and facilitators and offer guidance on addressing these challenges. We hope that this will reduce the inequity in palliative care provision in advanced chronic liver disease.

Nursing care for patients with cirrhosis

Cirrhosis represents a major cause of morbidity and mortality, leading to a marked impairment in the quality of life of patients and their caregivers, and resulting in a major burden on healthcare systems. Currently, in most countries, nurses still play a limited role in the care of patients with cirrhosis, which is mainly restricted to the care of patients hospitalised for acute complications of the disease. The current manuscript reviews the established and potential new and innovative roles that nurses can play in the care of patients with cirrhosis. In the hospital setting, specialised nurses should become an integral part of interprofessional teams, helping to improve the quality of care and outcomes of patients with cirrhosis. In the primary care setting, nurses should play an important role in the care of patients with compensated cirrhosis and also facilitate early diagnosis of cirrhosis in those at risk of liver diseases. This review calls for an improved global liver disease education programme for nurses and increased awareness among all healthcare providers and policymakers of the positive impacts of advanced or specialist nursing practice in this domain.

Needs-based triggers for timely referral to palliative care for older adults severely affected by noncancer conditions: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

BACKGROUND

Older people with noncancer conditions are less likely to be referred to palliative care services due to the inherent uncertain disease trajectory and a lack of standardised referral criteria. For older adults with noncancer conditions where prognostic estimation is unpredictable, needs-based criteria are likely more suitable. Eligibility criteria for participation in clinical trials on palliative care could inform a needs-based criteria. This review aimed to identify and synthesise eligibility criteria for trials in palliative care to construct a needs-based set of triggers for timely referral to palliative care for older adults severely affected by noncancer conditions.

METHODS

A systematic narrative review of published trials of palliative care service level interventions for older adults with noncancer conditions. Electronic databases Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov. were searched from inception to June 2022. We included all types of randomised controlled trials. We selected trials that reported eligibility criteria for palliative care involvement for older adults with noncancer conditions, where > 50% of the population was aged ≥ 65 years. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using a revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. Descriptive analysis and narrative synthesis provided descriptions of the patterns and appraised the applicability of included trial eligibility criteria to identify patients likely to benefit from receiving palliative care.

RESULTS

27 randomised controlled trials met eligibility out of 9,584 papers. We identified six major domains of trial eligibility criteria in three categories, needs-based, time-based and medical history-based criteria. Needs-based criteria were composed of symptoms, functional status, and quality of life criteria. The major trial eligibility criteria were diagnostic criteria (n = 26, 96%), followed by medical history-based criteria (n = 15, 56%), and physical and psychological symptom criteria (n = 14, 52%).

CONCLUSION

For older adults severely affected by noncancer conditions, decisions about providing palliative care should be based on the present needs related to symptoms, functional status, and quality of life. Further research is needed to examine how the needs-based triggers can be operationalized as referral criteria in clinical settings and develop international consensus on referral criteria for older adults with noncancer conditions.

Quality of end-of-life care with non-malignant liver disease: Analysis of the VOICES National Survey of Bereaved People

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Patients with liver disease struggle to access palliative care. We aimed to compare carers' perceptions of end-of-life care for decedents with non-malignant liver disease, malignant liver disease and other non-malignant diseases, and to identify associated factors in non-malignant liver disease.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of individual-level data from the National Survey of Bereaved People 2011-2015.

RESULTS

More decedents with non-malignant liver disease died in hospital than other diseases (76.9% vs. 40.9% vs. 50.2%, p < .001), despite 89% wishing to die at home. Fewer decedents received home/hospice specialist palliative care compared with those with malignant liver disease (10.0% vs. 54.6%, p < .001). Carers of decedents with non-malignant liver disease were less likely to rate overall end-of-life care quality as outstanding/excellent (29.3% vs. 43.9% vs. 42.3%, p < .001). For this group, poorer care was associated with younger (65-74 vs. 18-64 years, OR [odds ratio] 1.39, p = .01), more socially deprived decedents (OR .78, p = .02), and better care with greater social support (OR 1.82, p < .001) and community specialist palliative care involvement (OR 1.80, p < .001). There was no association between outstanding/excellent rating and underlying cause of non-malignant liver disease (alcohol-related vs. non-alcohol-related, p = .92) or place of death (hospital vs. non-hospital, p = .476).

CONCLUSIONS

End-of-life care could be improved by integrating hepatology and community services, particularly specialist palliative care, and advance care planning to facilitate care and death (where desired) at home. However, death in hospital may be appropriate for those with non-malignant liver disease.

Palliative long-term abdominal drains for the management of refractory ascites due to cirrhosis: a consensus document

Palliative care remains suboptimal in advanced cirrhosis, in part relating to a lack of evidence-based interventions. Ascites remains the most common cirrhosis complication resulting in hospitalisation. Many patients with refractory ascites are not candidates for liver transplantation or transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt, and therefore, require recurrent palliative large volume paracentesis in hospital. We review the available evidence on use of palliative long-term abdominal drains in cirrhosis. Pending results of a national trial (REDUCe 2) and consistent with recently published national and American guidance, long-term abdominal drains cannot be regarded as standard of care in advanced cirrhosis. They should instead be considered only on a case-by-case basis, pending definitive evidence. This manuscript provides consensus to help standardise use of long-term abdominal drains in cirrhosis including patient selection and community management. Our ultimate aim remains to improve palliative care for this under researched and vulnerable cohort.

Symptom control in advanced chronic liver disease: integrating anticipatory palliative and supportive care

The number of patients coming to hospital with liver disease is increasing. There was a worrying trend before the pandemic, and this has intensified. Despite improvements in the management of patients with advanced cirrhosis many patients will die within 6-12 months of first presentation, and, despite this, the field of palliative and supportive care in liver disease is still in its infancy. This is a narrative review. Evidence is often thin in this field. Where it exists it is cited, but much of the commentary here is based on the authors own experience and readers are free to consider it and debate it. Most patients who die of liver disease receive palliative care very late in their illness (if at all). There are many barriers to supportive and palliative care in liver disease which are discussed. Symptom control is often poor because of these barriers. Before symptomatic control can be established, patients in need of it must to be identified and conversations had about the severity of their situation and what their wishes would be. Interest in palliative and supportive care for patients liver disease is growing as is the number of hepatologists and palliative care clinicians within the UK with an interest. It is important that this enthusiasm and interest can be rolled out and scaled up across the UK so that all patients, wherever they are, can benefit. The aims of these articles are first to highlight and bring into focus the unmet need for palliative and supportive care in liver disease and second to provide suggestions for its integration into liver services. Ask yourself the question: where would I start in my hospital to help these patients?

Burdensome Transitions of Care for Patients with End-Stage Liver Disease and Their Caregivers

BACKGROUND

Patients with end-stage liver disease (ESLD) experience frequent readmissions; however, studies focused on patients' and caregivers' perceptions of their transitional care experiences to identify root causes of burdensome transitions of care are lacking.

AIM

To explore the transitional care experiences of patients with ESLD and their caregivers in order to identify their supportive care needs.

METHODS

We conducted interviews with 15 patients with ESLD and 14 informal caregivers. We used semi-structured interview guides to explore their experiences since the diagnosis of ESLD including their care transitions. Two raters coded interviews independently (κ = 0.95) using template analysis.

RESULTS

Participants reported feeling unprepared to manage their informational, psychosocial, and practical care needs as they transitioned from hospital to home after the diagnosis of ESLD. Delay in the timely receipt of supportive care services addressing these care needs resulted in hospital readmissions, emotional distress, caregiver burnout, reduced work capacity, and financial hardship. Participants shared the following resources that they perceived would improve their quality of care: (1) discharge checklist, (2) online resources, (3) mental health support, (4) caregiver support and training, and (5) financial navigation.

CONCLUSION

Transitional care models that attend to the informational, psychosocial, and practical domains of care are needed to better support patients with ESLD and their caregivers at the time of diagnosis and beyond. Without attending to the multidimensional care needs of newly diagnosed patients with ESLD and their caregivers, they are at risk of burdensome transitions of care, high healthcare utilization, and poor health-related quality of life.

Developing Priorities for Palliative Care Research in Advanced Liver Disease: A Multidisciplinary Approach

Individuals with advanced liver disease (AdvLD), such as decompensated cirrhosis (DC) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), have significant palliative needs. However, little research is available to guide health care providers on how to improve key domains related to palliative care (PC). We sought to identify priority areas for future research in PC by performing a comprehensive literature review and conducting iterative expert panel discussions. We conducted a literature review using search terms related to AdvLD and key PC domains. Individual reviews of these domains were performed, followed by iterative discussions by a panel consisting of experts from multiple disciplines, including hepatology, specialty PC, and nursing. Based on these discussions, priority areas for research were identified. We identified critical gaps in the available research related to PC and AdvLD. We developed and shared five key priority questions incorporating domains related to PC. Conclusion: Future research endeavors focused on improving PC in AdvLD should consider addressing the five key priorities areas identified from literature reviews and expert panel discussions.

What do we know about patients' perspectives and expectations relating to palliative and end-of-life care in advanced liver disease? A systematic review of qualitative literature using ENTREQ guidelines

BACKGROUND

Liver disease, a major cause of death worldwide, affects younger people compared with other major causes of death. Palliative and end-of-life care for these patients are often overlooked. Guidelines are emerging on what good end-of-life care in liver disease should look like, but there is a dearth of research into patients' perspectives even though they are most affected by these guidelines.

AIM

To explore current knowledge and understanding of patients' lived experiences, perspectives and expectations in relation to palliative and end-of-life care in advanced liver disease.

DESIGN

Systematic review with thematic synthesis complying to the enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research (ENTREQ) statement.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Database searches (Ovid Medline, 1946-2021 and Web of Science, 1970-2021) to identify qualitative studies exploring patients' perspectives of palliative and end-of-life care in advanced liver disease.

FINDINGS

Only eight articles met all criteria. Themes demonstrated repeated hospital admissions towards the end of life, lack of coordinated care in community and barriers in discussion about palliative care in end-stage liver disease due to lack of confidence among professionals and a negative view about palliative care among patients and carers. Emotional, financial and disability-related needs of patients and their carers are often neglected.

CONCLUSION

There is a dearth of studies exploring patients' perspectives about care in advanced liver disease relating to palliative and end-of-life care. Lack of coordinated community support and honest conversations around palliative care leads to reduced quality of life. More primary research from diverse population is needed to improve palliative care and end-of-life care in end-stage liver disease.

Management of the major complications of cirrhosis: Beyond guidelines

Along with a growing understanding of the pathophysiology of cirrhosis and its complications, new therapies and management strategies have emerged in recent years. Many of these advances have helped inform the current EASL clinical practice guidelines¹ on the management of some of the key complications of cirrhosis, such as ascites, variceal bleeding and infection. However, there are still some aspects of management where the evidence base is less clear, and/or where opinions amongst practitioners remain divided. Some of these more controversial areas are explored in this section, wherein we present evidence culminating in a suggested management approach based on expert opinion and extending beyond the current guidelines.

Strategies to Improve Delivery of Cirrhosis Care

Purpose of review

This review provides an overview of the current state of research around improving healthcare delivery for patients with cirrhosis in the outpatient, inpatient, and transitional care settings.

Recent findings

Recent studies have broadly employed changes to the model of care delivery, team composition, and technology to improve cirrhosis care. In the outpatient setting, approaches have included engaging caregivers, patient navigators, and non-physicians and using virtual care, smartphone applications, and wearables. Inpatient care approaches have focused on the role of interdisciplinary teams, education interventions, and changes to the medical record system, while post-discharge interventions have included day hospitals and care coordinator interventions. This review also describes the Veterans Health Administration’s novel, population-level approach to delivery of cirrhosis care, and addressed how the pandemic has impacted the delivery of cirrhosis care.

Summary

Comprehensive, evidence-based approaches to delivering high-quality cirrhosis care continue to evolve to meet the needs of a growing population in an ever-changing healthcare environment.

Impact of Palliative Care Services on Treatment and Resource Utilization for Hepatorenal Syndrome in the United States

Background: This study aimed to determine the rates of inpatient palliative care service use and assess the impact of palliative care service use on in-hospital treatments and resource utilization in hospital admissions for hepatorenal syndrome. Methods: Using the National Inpatient Sample, hospital admissions with a primary diagnosis of hepatorenal syndrome were identified from 2003 through 2014. The primary outcome of interest was the temporal trend and predictors of inpatient palliative care service use. Logistic and linear regression was performed to assess the impact of inpatient palliative care service on in-hospital treatments and resource use. Results: Of 5571 hospital admissions for hepatorenal syndrome, palliative care services were used in 748 (13.4%) admissions. There was an increasing trend in the rate of palliative care service use, from 3.3% in 2003 to 21.1% in 2014 (p < 0.001). Older age, more recent year of hospitalization, acute liver failure, alcoholic cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma were predictive of increased palliative care service use, whereas race other than Caucasian, African American, and Hispanic and chronic kidney disease were predictive of decreased palliative care service use. Although hospital admission with palliative care service use had higher mortality, palliative care service was associated with lower use of invasive mechanical ventilation, blood product transfusion, paracentesis, renal replacement, vasopressor but higher DNR status. Palliative care services reduced mean length of hospital stay and hospitalization cost. Conclusion: Although there was a substantial increase in the use of palliative care service in hospitalizations for hepatorenal syndrome, inpatient palliative care service was still underutilized. The use of palliative care service was associated with reduced resource use.

The Correlation and Influencing Factors of Crisis Response Ability and Psychological Factors in Patients with Liver Cirrhosis

Background:

Illness can provoke a crisis response that affects condition acceptance, treatment and recovery. Patients’ sense of coherence can influence this explored across patient cohorts internationally. However, few studies examine these effects in patients with hepatic cirrhosis. This study investigated sense of coherence and social support of patients with hepatic cirrhosis.

Methods:

The psychological status of 146 patients admitted to the Digestive System Department, First Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China from Mar 2016 to Mar 2019 with hepatic cirrhosis was assessed using the Sense of Coherence (SOC-13), Social Support Rating Scale (SSRS) and crisis assessment scales.

Results:

There was a low level of crisis response in patients with hepatic cirrhosis that was influenced by age, disease course, education level and Child-Pugh grade and negatively correlated with sense of coherence and social support.

Conclusion:

Liver cirrhosis patients had a low level of crisis response. As the level of crisis response in is correlated with patients' sense of coherence, social support and educational level, careful assessment, tailored educational interventions and mobilizing of family support are important to maximize responses to illness and thus improve quality of life.

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of hospital-based specialist palliative care for adults with advanced illness and their caregivers

BACKGROUND

Serious illness is often characterised by physical/psychological problems, family support needs, and high healthcare resource use. Hospital-based specialist palliative care (HSPC) has developed to assist in better meeting the needs of patients and their families and potentially reducing hospital care expenditure. There is a need for clarity on the effectiveness and optimal models of HSPC, given that most people still die in hospital and also to allocate scarce resources judiciously.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of HSPC compared to usual care for adults with advanced illness (hereafter patients) and their unpaid caregivers/families.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, CDSR, DARE and HTA database via the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; Embase; CINAHL; PsycINFO; CareSearch; National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) and two trial registers to August 2019, together with checking of reference lists and relevant systematic reviews, citation searching and contact with experts to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the impact of HSPC on outcomes for patients or their unpaid caregivers/families, or both. HSPC was defined as specialist palliative care delivered by a palliative care team that is based in a hospital providing holistic care, co-ordination by a multidisciplinary team, and collaboration between HSPC providers and generalists. HSPC was provided to patients while they were admitted as inpatients to acute care hospitals, outpatients or patients receiving care from hospital outreach teams at home. The comparator was usual care, defined as inpatient or outpatient hospital care without specialist palliative care input at the point of entry into the study, community care or hospice care provided outside of the hospital setting.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We assessed risk of bias and extracted data. To account for use of different scales across studies, we calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous data. We used an inverse variance random-effects model. For binary data, we calculated odds ratio (ORs) with 95% CIs. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table. Our primary outcomes were patient health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and symptom burden (a collection of two or more symptoms). Key secondary outcomes were pain, depression, satisfaction with care, achieving preferred place of death, mortality/survival, unpaid caregiver burden, and cost-effectiveness. Qualitative data was analysed where available.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 42 RCTs involving 7779 participants (6678 patients and 1101 caregivers/family members). Twenty-one studies were with cancer populations, 14 were with non-cancer populations (of which six were with heart failure patients), and seven with mixed cancer and non-cancer populations (mixed diagnoses). HSPC was offered in different ways and included the following models: ward-based, inpatient consult, outpatient, hospital-at-home or hospital outreach, and service provision across multiple settings which included hospital. For our main analyses, we pooled data from studies reporting adjusted endpoint values. Forty studies had a high risk of bias in at least one domain. Compared with usual care, HSPC improved patient HRQoL with a small effect size of 0.26 SMD over usual care (95% CI 0.15 to 0.37; I² = 3%, 10 studies, 1344 participants, low-quality evidence, higher scores indicate better patient HRQoL). HSPC also improved other person-centred outcomes. It reduced patient symptom burden with a small effect size of -0.26 SMD over usual care (95% CI -0.41 to -0.12; I² = 0%, 6 studies, 761 participants, very low-quality evidence, lower scores indicate lower symptom burden). HSPC improved patient satisfaction with care with a small effect size of 0.36 SMD over usual care (95% CI 0.41 to 0.57; I² = 0%, 2 studies, 337 participants, low-quality evidence, higher scores indicate better patient satisfaction with care). Using home death as a proxy measure for achieving patient's preferred place of death, patients were more likely to die at home with HSPC compared to usual care (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.16; I² = 0%, 7 studies, 861 participants, low-quality evidence). Data on pain (4 studies, 525 participants) showed no evidence of a difference between HSPC and usual care (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.01; I² = 0%, very low-quality evidence). Eight studies (N = 1252 participants) reported on adverse events and very low-quality evidence did not demonstrate an effect of HSPC on serious harms. Two studies (170 participants) presented data on caregiver burden and both found no evidence of effect of HSPC (very low-quality evidence). We included 13 economic studies (2103 participants). Overall, the evidence on cost-effectiveness of HSPC compared to usual care was inconsistent among the four full economic studies. Other studies that used only partial economic analysis and those that presented more limited resource use and cost information also had inconsistent results (very low-quality evidence). Quality of the evidence The quality of the evidence assessed using GRADE was very low to low, downgraded due to a high risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecision.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Very low- to low-quality evidence suggests that when compared to usual care, HSPC may offer small benefits for several person-centred outcomes including patient HRQoL, symptom burden and patient satisfaction with care, while also increasing the chances of patients dying in their preferred place (measured by home death). While we found no evidence that HSPC causes serious harms, the evidence was insufficient to draw strong conclusions. Although these are only small effect sizes, they may be clinically relevant at an advanced stage of disease with limited prognosis, and are person-centred outcomes important to many patients and families. More well conducted studies are needed to study populations with non-malignant diseases and mixed diagnoses, ward-based models of HSPC, 24 hours access (out-of-hours care) as part of HSPC, pain, achieving patient preferred place of care, patient satisfaction with care, caregiver outcomes (satisfaction with care, burden, depression, anxiety, grief, quality of life), and cost-effectiveness of HSPC. In addition, research is needed to provide validated person-centred outcomes to be used across studies and populations.

Randomised clinical trial: palliative long-term abdominal drains vs large-volume paracentesis in refractory ascites due to cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Palliative care remains suboptimal in end-stage liver disease.

AIM

To inform a definitive study, we assessed palliative long-term abdominal drains in end-stage liver disease to determine recruitment, attrition, safety/potential effectiveness, questionnaires/interview uptake/completion and make a preliminary cost comparison.

METHODS

A 12-week feasibility nonblinded randomised controlled trial comparing large-volume paracentesis vs long-term abdominal drains in refractory ascites due to end-stage liver disease with fortnightly home visits for clinical/questionnaire-based assessments. Study success criteria were attrition not >50%, <10% long-term abdominal drain removal due to complications, the long-term abdominal drain group to spend <50% ascites-related study time in hospital vs large-volume paracentesis group and 80% questionnaire/interview uptake/completion.

RESULTS

Of 59 eligible patients, 36 (61%) were randomised, 17 to long-term abdominal drain and 19 to large-volume paracentesis. Following randomisation, median number (IQR) of hospital ascitic drains (long-term abdominal drain group vs large-volume paracentesis group) were 0 (0-1) vs 4 (3-7); week 12 serum albumin (g/L) and serum creatinine (μmol/L) were 29 (26.5-32.5) vs 30 (25-35) and 104.5 (81-115.5) vs 127 (63-158) respectively. Total attrition was 42% (long-term abdominal drain group 47%, large-volume paracentesis group 37%). Median (IQR) fortnightly community/hospital/social care ascites-related costs and percentage study time in hospital were lower in the long-term abdominal drain group, £329 (253-580) vs £843 (603-1060) and 0% (0-0.74) vs 2.75% (2.35-3.84) respectively. Self-limiting cellulitis/leakage occurred in 41% (7/17) in the long-term abdominal drain group vs 11% (2/19) in the large-volume paracentesis group; peritonitis incidence was 6% (1/17) vs 11% (2/19) respectively. Questionnaires/interview uptake/completion were ≥80%; interviews indicated that long-term abdominal drains could transform the care pathway.

CONCLUSIONS

The REDUCe study demonstrates feasibility with preliminary evidence of long-term abdominal drain acceptability/effectiveness/safety and reduction in health resource utilisation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN30697116, date assigned: 07/10/2015.

Nonhospice Palliative Care Within the Treatment of End-Stage Liver Disease

Palliative care (PC) that has evolved from a focus on end-of-life care to an expanded form of holistic care at an early stage for patients with serious illnesses and their families is commonly referred to as nonhospice PC (or early PC). Patients with end-stage liver disease (ESLD) suffer from a high symptom burden and a deteriorated quality of life (QOL), with uncertain prognosis and limited treatment options. Caregivers of these patients also bear an emotional and physical burden similar to that of caregivers for patients with cancer. Despite the proven benefits of nonhospice PC for other serious illnesses and cancer, there are no evidence-based structures and processes to support its integration within the routine care of patients with ESLD and their caregivers. In this article, we review the current state of PC for ESLD and propose key structures and processes to integrate nonhospice PC within routine hepatology practice. Results found that PC is highly underutilized within ESLD care, and limited prospective studies are available to demonstrate methods to integrate PC within routine hepatology practices. Hepatology providers report lack of training to deliver PC along with no clear prognostic criteria on when to initiate PC. A well-informed model with key structures and processes for nonhospice PC integration would allow hepatology providers to improve clinical outcomes and QOL for patients with ESLD and reduce health care costs. Educating hepatology providers about PC principles and developing clear prognostic criteria for when and how to integrate PC on the basis of individual patient needs are the initial steps to inform the integration. The fields of nonhospice PC and hepatology have ample opportunities to partner clinically and academically.

A Methodological Review of Mixed Methods Research in Palliative and End-of-Life Care (2014-2019)

Mixed methods research has been increasingly recognized as a useful approach for describing and explaining complex issues in palliative care and end-of-life research. However, little is known about the use of this methodology in the field and the ways in which mixed methods studies have been reported. The purpose of this methodological review was to examine the characteristics, methodological features and reporting quality of mixed methods articles published in palliative care research. The authors screened all articles published in eight journals specialized in palliative care between January 2014 and April 2019. Those that reported a mixed methods study (n = 159) were included. The Good Reporting of a Mixed Methods Study (GRAMMS) criteria were used to assess reporting quality. Findings showed that 57.9% of the identified studies used a convergent design and 82.4% mentioned complementarity as their main purpose for using a mixed methods approach. The reporting quality of the articles generally showed a need for improvement as authors usually did not describe the type of mixed methods design used and provided little detail on the integration of quantitative and qualitative methods. Based on the findings, recommendations are made to improve the quality of reporting of mixed methods articles in palliative care.

Palliative care in liver disease: what does good look like?

The mortality rate from chronic liver disease in the UK is rising rapidly, and patients with advanced disease have a symptom burden comparable to or higher than that experienced in other life-limiting illnesses. While evidence is limited, there is growing recognition that care of patients with advanced disease needs to improve. Many factors limit widespread provision of good palliative care to these patients, including the unpredictable trajectory of chronic liver disease, the misconception that palliative care and end-of-life care are synonymous, lack of confidence in prescribing and lack of time and resources. Healthcare professionals managing these patients need to develop the skills to ensure effective delivery of core palliative care, with referral to specialist palliative care services reserved for those with complex needs. Core palliative care is best delivered by the hepatology team in parallel with active disease management. This includes ensuring that discussions about disease trajectory and advance care planning occur alongside active management of disease complications. Liver disease is strongly associated with significant social, psychological and financial hardships for patients and their carers; strategies that involve the wider multidisciplinary team at an early stage in the disease trajectory help ensure proactive management of such issues. This review summarises the evidence supporting palliative care for patients with advanced chronic liver disease, presents examples of current best practice and provides pragmatic suggestions for how palliative and disease-modifying care can be run in parallel, such that patients do not miss opportunities for interventions that improve their quality of life.

Current Knowledge, Barriers to Implementation, and Future Directions in Palliative Care for End-Stage Liver Disease

End-stage liver disease (ESLD) is associated with a high degree of morbidity and mortality as well as symptom burden. Despite this, the rate of consultation with palliative care (PC) providers remains low, and invasive procedures near the end of life are commonplace. Studies show that involvement of PC providers improves patient satisfaction, and evidence from other chronic diseases demonstrates reduced costs of care and potentially increased survival. Better integration of PC is imperative but hindered by patient and provider misconceptions about its role in the care of patients with ESLD, specifically among candidates for liver transplantation. Additionally, reimbursement barriers and lack of provider knowledge may contribute to PC underutilization. In this review, we discuss the benefits of PC in ESLD, the variability of its delivery, and key stakeholders' perceptions about its use. Additionally, we identify barriers to more widespread PC adoption and highlight areas for future research.