"It's Like a Death Sentence but It Really Isn't" What Patients and Families Want to Know About Hospice Care When Making End-of-Life Decisions

Evaluation of a Novel Hospice-Specific Patient Decision Aid

Background: We tested a novel hospice-specific patient decision aid to determine whether the decision aid could improve hospice knowledge, opinions of hospice, and decision self-efficacy in making decisions about hospice. Methods: Two patient-level randomized studies were conducted using two different cohorts. Recruitment was completed from March 2019 through May 2020. Cohort #1 was recruited from an academic hospital and a safety-net hospital and Cohort #2 was recruited from community members. Participants were randomized to review a hospice-specific patient decision aid. The primary outcomes were change in hospice knowledge, hospice beliefs and attitudes, and decision self-efficacy Wilcoxon signed rank tests were used to evaluate differences on the primary outcomes between baseline and 1-month. Participants: Participants were at least 65 years of age. A total of 266 participants enrolled (131 in Cohort #1 and 135 in Cohort #2). Participants were randomized to the intervention group (n = 156) or control group (n = 109). The sample was 74% (n = 197) female, 58% (n = 156) African American and mean age was 74.9. Results: Improvements in hospice knowledge between baseline and 1-month were observed in both the intervention and the control groups with no differences between groups (.43 vs .275 points, P = .823). There were no observed differences between groups on Hospice Beliefs and Attitudes scale (3.29 vs 3.08, P = .076). In contrast, Decision Self-Efficacy improved in both groups and the effect of the intervention was significant (8.04 vs 2.90, P = -.027). Conclusions: The intervention demonstrated significant improvements in decision self-efficacy but not in hospice knowledge or hospice beliefs and attitudes.

Hospice preference of the family decision-makers for cancer patients in China: an exploratory study

BACKGROUND

The reasons for hospice underuse in China need exploration from the perspective of patients with cancer and their families. Furthermore, existing literature about hospice decision-making among Chinese families with cancer patients is limited. This study aimed to investigate the awareness of hospice care among families with cancer patients, their preference for healthcare at the end-of-life stage of care, and the predictors of hospice preference.

METHODS

This was an exploratory study conducted between July 2021 and January 2022. Overall, 300 decision-makers of cancer patients were recruited from the oncology ward of seven hospitals in Shanghai, China. Of these, 285 valid responses were included in the data analysis. A self-developed questionnaire about their preference for healthcare when the patient was at the end-of-life stage was completed. Descriptive analysis, t-test, chi-square test, and multivariable logistic regression were conducted to analyze the data.

RESULTS

Only 46.0% of the participants have heard of hospice care. Most participants (78.2%) reported no introduction to hospice care from their doctors. More than half of the participants (58.2%) did not have a preference for healthcare at the end-of-life stage. Seventy-eight (65.5%) of the 119 participants who had a preference chose hospice care, and the other 41 participants (34.5%) refused hospice care. Having heard of hospice care had a significant impact on preferring healthcare at the end-of-life stage (adjusted OR = 14.346, 95%CI 7.219-28.509, p < 0.001). Not being sure whether the doctor introduced hospice care before had a significant impact on having no preference for healthcare at the end-of-life stage (adjusted OR = 0.180, 95%CI 0.052-0.617, p = 0.006). Another family member being cared for at home had a significant impact on the participants' hospice preference (adjusted OR = 2.739, 95%CI 1.159-6.470, p = 0.022).

CONCLUSION

The end-of-life communication between healthcare providers and the families of cancer patients is insufficient. More efforts should be made in increasing the awareness of hospice care among patients with cancer and their families. Further study is needed to explore the reasons for a lack of discussion on hospice options between healthcare providers and the patients' families. Additionally, the impact of the at-home care burden on the hospice choice of families with cancer patients requires further study.

How Do Patients Describe Hospice Care? A Qualitative Analysis of the Language Used by Older Adults to Describe Hospice Care

Background: Misconceptions about hospice are prevalent and create barriers to hospice enrollment. These misconceptions may be a result of the confusing language around hospice care. Objective: To conduct a content analysis exploring the language used and accuracy in which older adults describe hospice. Design: Participants in two prior studies were asked to describe hospice in their own words. Responses were coded inductively to explore the language used, and deductively to evaluate accuracy in describing hospice. Subjects: Two hundred sixty-six adults, aged at least 65 years or older. Results: The most common language used to describe hospice care related to "comfort," "care," and "family." Most participants accurately describe hospice eligibility, services, and goals of care but inaccurately described location of hospices services. Conclusions: Participants accurately described most of the logistical aspects of hospice care and words such as comfort, care, and family are commonly used to describe services suggesting preferred language for communication interventions. Clinicaltrials.gov (Cohort #1 NCT03794700 and Cohort #2 NCT04458090).

Patient Portals to Support Palliative and End-of-Life Care: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Although patient portals are widely used for health promotion, little is known about the use of palliative care and end-of-life (PCEOL) portal tools available for patients and caregivers.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to identify and assess the user perspectives of PCEOL portal tools available to patients and caregivers described and evaluated in the literature.

METHODS

We performed a scoping review of the academic literature directed by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) extension for Scoping Review and searched three databases. Sources were included if they reported the development or testing of a feature, resource, tool, or intervention; focused on at least one PCEOL domain defined by the National Coalition for Hospice and Palliative Care; targeted adults with serious illness or caregivers; and were offered via a patient portal tethered to an electronic medical record. We independently screened the titles and abstracts (n=796) for eligibility. Full-text (84/796, 10.6%) sources were reviewed. We abstracted descriptions of the portal tool name, content, targeted population, and reported user acceptability for each tool from included sources (n=19).

RESULTS

In total, 19 articles describing 12 tools were included, addressing the following PCEOL domains: ethical or legal (n=5), physical (n=5), and psychological or psychiatric (n=2). No tools for bereavement or hospice care were identified. Studies have reported high acceptability of tools among users; however, few sources commented on usability among older adults.

CONCLUSIONS

PCEOL patient portal tools are understudied. As medical care increasingly moves toward virtual platforms, future research should investigate the usability and acceptability of PCEOL patient portal resources and evaluate their impact on health outcomes.

Development of a Decision Aid for Patients and Families Considering Hospice

Background: Hospice is underutilized. Miscommunication, decisional complexity, and misunderstanding around engaging hospice may contribute. Shared decision making (SDM), aided by patient decision aids (PtDAs), can improve knowledge and decision quality. Currently, there are no freely available hospice-specific PtDA to facilitate conversions between patients and providers about hospice care. Objective: To develop a theory-based and unbiased hospice specific PtDA. Design: Guided by the Ottawa Decision Support Framework and International Patient Decision Aid Standards, we used a theory-driven, eight-step, iterative, user-centered approach with multistakeholder input to develop a hospice-specific PtDA for anyone facing end-of-life decisions. Subjects: Feedback was obtained from a 10-member Patient Advisory Panel composed of lay patient advisors; focus groups of hospice providers, family caregivers, and patients; and the Palliative Care Research Group at University of Colorado Hospital consisting of palliative care physicians, midlevel providers, nurses, social workers, chaplains, and researchers. Results: There are many challenges in developing an unbiased hospice decision aid, including (1) balancing the provision of education (eligibility, payment) with decisional support, (2) clarifying values and incorporating emotion, (3) ideally representing the potential downsides of hospice, and (4) adequately capturing and describing care alternatives to hospice. Within this context, we developed a 12-page article and 17-minute video PtDAs. The PtDA openly acknowledges the emotional complexity of the decision and incorporates values clarification techniques to help decision makers reflect and evaluate their goals and preferences for end-of-life care. Conclusions: Hospice decision making is complex and emotional, demanding high-quality SDM aided by a formal PtDA. This work resulted in a freely available article and video PtDA for patients considering hospice. The effectiveness and implementation of these tools will be studied in future research. Clinical Trials Registration (NCT03794700 & NCT04458090).