Is the content of guidelines/pathways a barrier for the integration of palliative Care in Chronic Heart Failure (CHF) and chronic pulmonary obstructive disease (COPD)? A comparison with the case of cancer in Europe

What to consider when implementing a tool for timely recognition of palliative care needs in heart failure: a context-based qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Needs assessment tools can facilitate healthcare professionals in timely recognition of palliative care needs. Despite the increased attention for implementation of such tools, most studies provide little or no attention to the context of implementation. The aim of this study was to explore factors that contribute positively and negatively to timely screening of palliative care needs in advanced chronic heart failure.

METHODS

Qualitative study using individual interviews and focus groups with healthcare professionals. The data were analysed using a deductive approach. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used to conceptualise the contextual factors.

RESULTS

Twenty nine healthcare professionals with different backgrounds and working in heart failure care in the Southern and Eastern parts of the Netherlands participated. Several factors were perceived to play a role, such as perception and knowledge about palliative care, awareness of palliative care needs in advanced chronic heart failure, perceived difficulty when and how to start palliative care, limited acceptance to treatment boundaries in cardiology, limited communication and collaboration between healthcare professionals, and need for education and increased attention for palliative care in advanced chronic heart failure guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

This study clarified critical factors targeting patients, healthcare professionals, organisations to implement a needs assessment tool for timely recognition of palliative care needs in the context of advanced chronic heart failure. A multifaceted implementation strategy is needed which has attention for education, patient empowerment, interdisciplinary collaboration, identification of local champions, chronic heart failure specific guidelines and culture.

Referral criteria to palliative care for patients with respiratory disease: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Advanced non-malignant respiratory diseases are associated with significant patient morbidity, yet access to palliative care occurs late, if at all.

AIM

To examine referral criteria for palliative care among patients with advanced non-malignant respiratory disease, with a view to developing a standardised set of referral criteria.

DESIGN

Systematic review of all studies reporting on referral criteria to palliative care in advanced non-malignant respiratory disease, with a focus on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and interstitial lung disease.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review conducted and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses guideline was undertaken using electronic databases (Ovid, MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and PubMed).

RESULTS

Searches yielded 2052 unique titles, which were screened for eligibility resulting in 62 studies addressing referral criteria to palliative care in advanced non-malignant respiratory disease. Of 18 categories put forward for referral to palliative care, the most commonly discussed factors were hospital use (69% of papers), indicators of poor respiratory status (47%), physical and emotional symptoms (37%), functional decline (29%), need for advanced respiratory therapies (27%), and disease progression (26%).

CONCLUSION

Clinicians consider referral to specialist palliative care for a wide range of disease- and needs-based criteria. Our findings highlight the need to standardise palliative care access by developing consensus referral criteria for patients with advanced non-malignant respiratory illnesses.

The Association of Advance Care Planning Documentation and End-of-Life Healthcare Use Among Patients With Multimorbidity

PURPOSE

Multimorbidity is associated with increased intensity of end-of-life healthcare. This association has been examined by number but not type of conditions. Our purpose was to understand how intensity of care is influenced by multimorbidity within specific chronic conditions to provide guidance for interventions to improve end-of-life care for these patients.

METHODS

We identified adults cared for in a multihospital healthcare system who died between 2010-2017. We categorized patients by 4 primary chronic conditions: heart failure, pulmonary disease, renal disease, or dementia. Within each condition, we examined the effect of multimorbidity (presence of 4 or more chronic conditions) on hospital and ICU admission in the last 30 days of life, in-hospital death, and advance care planning (ACP) documentation >30 days before death. We performed logistic regression to estimate associations between multimorbidity and end-of-life care utilization, stratified by the presence or absence of ACP documentation.

RESULTS

ACP documentation >30 days before death was associated with lower odds of in-hospital death for all 4 conditions both in patients with and without multimorbidity. With the exception of patients with renal disease without multimorbidity, we observed lower odds of hospitalization and ICU admission for all patients with ACP >30 days before death.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with dementia and multimorbidity had the highest odds of high-intensity end-of-life care. For patients with dementia, heart failure, or pulmonary disease, ACP documentation >30 days before death was associated with lower likelihood of in-hospital death, hospitalization, and ICU use at end-of-life, regardless of multimorbidity.

Disseminating research findings using a massive online open course for maximising impact and developing recommendations for practice

Background

Developing recommendations for how we deliver healthcare is often left to leading experts in a field. Findings from the Integrated Palliative Care in cancer and chronic conditions (InSup-C) study, which aimed to identify best practice in integrated palliative care in cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and heart failure, led to recommendations developed through an expert consultation process. We also wanted to develop these recommendations further with participants who were largely clinicians and members of the public.

Methods

Results from the InSup-C study were disseminated through a three-week massive open online course (MOOC) which ran in 2016, 2017 and 2019. The first course helped develop the final recommendations, which were ranked by MOOC participants in the subsequent courses. MOOC participants were predominantly clinicians, but also academics and members of the public. They rated how important each recommendation was on a 9 point scale (9 most important). Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the ratings. The results were compared to findings from the consultation.

Results

Five hundred fifteen completed the last part of the course where the recommendations were ranked, of which 195 (38%) completed the ratings. The top recommendations related to: need to expand palliative care to non-malignant conditions; palliative care needs to include different dimensions of care including physical, psychological and spiritual; policies and regulations assessments should be made regularly; palliative care integration should be mandatory; and there should be greater availability of medicines. These differed compared to the top ranked recommendations by the consultation panel in relation to the importance of leadership and policy making. This may indicate that clinicians are more focused on daily care rather than the (inter) national agenda.

Conclusions

Whilst both sets of recommendations are important, our study shows that we need to include the views of clinicians and the public rather than rely upon leading expert opinion alone. To keep recommendations fresh we need both the input of clinicians, the public and experts. When disseminating findings, MOOCs offer a useful way to gain greater reach with clinicians and the public, and importantly could be a vehicle to validate recommendations made by leading expert panels.

Barriers to Early Utilization of Palliative Care in Heart Failure: A Narrative Review

Palliative care is indicated in patients with heart failure since the early phases of the disease, as suggested by international guidelines. However, patients are referred to palliative care very late. Many barriers could explain the gap between the guidelines’ indications and clinical practice. The term palliative is perceived as a stigma by doctors, patients, and family members because it is charged with negative meanings, a poor prognosis, and no hope for improvement. Many authors prefer the term supportive care, which could facilitate a discussion between doctors, patients, and caregivers. There is substantial variation and overlap in the meanings assigned to these two terms in the literature. Prognosis, as the main indication to palliative care, delays its implementation. It is necessary to modify this paradigm, moving from prognosis to patients’ needs. The lack of access to palliative care programs is often due to a lack of palliative care specialists and this shortage will be greater in the near future. In this study, a new model is proposed to integrate early over the course of the disease the palliative care (PC) specialist in the heart failure team, allowing to overcome the barriers and to achieve truly simultaneous care in the treatment of heart failure (HF) patients.