Life-Sustaining Treatment in End-Stage Liver Disease Patients: Patients' Decisions and Results

Palliative care for end-stage liver disease and acute on chronic liver failure: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

End stage liver disease (ESLD) represents a growing health concern characterized by elevated morbidity and mortality, particularly among individual ineligible for liver transplantation. The demand for palliative care (PC) is pronounced in patients grappling with ESLD and acute on chronic liver failure (ACLF). Unfortunately, the historical underutilization of PC in ESLD patients, despite their substantial needs and those of their family caregivers, underscores the imperative of seamlessly integrating PC principles into routine healthcare practices across the entire disease spectrum.

AIM

To comprehensively investigate the evidence surrounding the benefits of incorporating PC into the comprehensive care plan for individuals confronting ESLD and/or ACLF.

METHODS

A systematic search in the Medline (PubMed) database was performed using a predetermined search command, encompassing studies published in English without any restrictions on the publication date. Subsequently, the retrieved studies were manually examined. Simple descriptive analyses were employed to summarize the results.

RESULTS

The search strategies yielded 721 references. Following the final analysis, 32 full-length references met the inclusion criteria and were consequently incorporated into the study. Meticulous data extraction from these 32 studies was undertaken, leading to the execution of a comprehensive narrative systematic review. The review found that PC provides significant benefits, reducing symptom burden, depressive symptoms, readmission rates, and hospital stays. Yet, barriers like the appeal of transplants and misconceptions about PC hinder optimal utilization. Integrating PC early, upon the diagnosis of ESLD and ACLF, regardless of transplant eligibility and availability, improves the quality of life for these patients.

CONCLUSION

Despite the substantial suffering and poor prognosis associated with ESLD and ACLF, where liver transplantation stands as the only curative treatment, albeit largely inaccessible, PC services have been overtly provided too late in the course of the illness. A comprehensive understanding of PC's pivotal role in treating ESLD and ACLF is crucial for overcoming these barriers, involving healthcare providers, patients, and caregivers.

An Integrative Review of the State of POLST Science: What Do We Know and Where Do We Go?

OBJECTIVES

POLST is widely used in the care of seriously ill patients to document decisions made during advance care planning (ACP) conversations as actionable medical orders. We conducted an integrative review of existing research to better understand associations between POLST use and key ACP outcomes as well as to identify directions for future research.

DESIGN

Integrative review.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Not applicable.

METHODS

We queried PubMed and CINAHL databases using names of POLST programs to identify research on POLST. We abstracted study information and assessed study design quality. Study outcomes were categorized using the international ACP Outcomes Framework: Process, Action, Quality of Care, Health Status, and Healthcare Utilization.

RESULTS

Of 94 POLST studies identified, 38 (40%) had at least a moderate level of study design quality and 15 (16%) included comparisons between POLST vs non-POLST patient groups. There was a significant difference between groups for 40 of 70 (57%) ACP outcomes. The highest proportion of significant outcomes was in Quality of Care (15 of 19 or 79%). In subdomain analyses of Quality of Care, POLST use was significantly associated with concordance between treatment and documentation (14 of 18 or 78%) and preferences concordant with documentation (1 of 1 or 100%). The Action outcome domain had the second highest positive rate among outcome domains; 9 of 12 (75%) Action outcomes were significant. Healthcare Utilization outcomes were the most frequently assessed and approximately half (16 of 35 or 46%) were significant. Health Status outcomes were not significant (0 of 4 or 0%), and no Process outcomes were identified.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Findings of this review indicate that POLST use is significantly associated with a Quality of Care and Action outcomes, albeit in nonrandomized studies. Future research on POLST should focus on prospective mixed methods studies and high-quality pragmatic trials that assess a broad range of person and health system-level outcomes.

Characteristics of Life-Sustaining Treatment Decisions: National Data Analysis in South Korea

This study analyzed the national data on life-sustaining treatment decisions from 2018 to 2020 to find out the characteristics of South Korea's end-of-life procedure according to the decision-making approach and process. We collected the data of 84,422 patients registered with the National Agency for Management of Life-sustaining Treatment. We divided the patients into four groups (G1, G2, G3, and G4) according to the decision-making approach. A descriptive analysis of each group was conducted using indicators such as the patient's age, status, diagnosis, and content of forgoing life-sustaining treatment. Additionally, logistic regression analysis was performed by dividing the patients into self-determining (G1, G2) and non-self-determining patients (G3, G4). Cancer was the most common diagnosis for each group. The period from life-sustaining treatment decision to implementation was 10.76, 1.01, 0.86, and 1.19 days for G1, G2, G3, and G4, respectively. In the logistic regression analysis, the self-determination ratio was higher for 40-49 years old and lower for cardiovascular disease and gastrointestinal disease. Age was has a major impact on life-sustaining treatment decisions (LSTD), and with increase in age, the family, and not the patient, made the LSTD. The LSTD method also differed depending on the disease. The self-determination rates of patients with circulatory or digestive diseases were somewhat lower than that of those with neoplastic diseases. The period from decision-making to implementation is short for end-of-life care.

Comparing Perceptions, Determinants, and Needs of Patients, Family Members, Nurses, and Physicians When Making Life-Sustaining Treatment Decisions for Patients with Hematologic Malignancies

Purpose

This descriptive study compared the perceptions, determinants, and needs of patients, family members, nurses, and physicians regarding life-sustaining treatment decisions for patients with hematologic malignancies in the hematology-oncology department of a tertiary hospital in Seoul, Korea.

Methods

In total, 147 subjects were recruited, gave written consent, and provided data by completing a structured questionnaire. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance, the chi-square test, and the Fisher exact test.

Results

Nurses (F=3.35) and physicians (F=3.57) showed significantly greater familiarity with the Act on Decisions on Life-Sustaining Treatment than patients (F=2.69) and family members (F=2.59); (F=19.58, P<0.001). Many respondents, including 19 (51.4%) family members, 16 (43.2%) physicians, and 11 (29.7%) nurses, agreed that the patient's opinion had the greatest effect when making life-sustaining treatment decisions. Twelve (33.3%) patients answered that mental, physical, and financial burdens were the most important factors in life-sustaining treatment decisions, and there was a significant difference among the four groups (P<0.001). Twenty-four patients (66.7%), 27 (73.0%) family members, and 21(56.8%) nurses answered that physicians were the most appropriate people to provide information regarding life-sustaining treatment decisions. Unexpectedly, 19 (51.4%) physicians answered that hospice nurse practitioners were the most appropriate people to talk to about life-sustaining treatment (P<0.001).

Conclusion

It is of utmost importance that the patient and physician determine when life-sustaining treatment should be withdrawn, with the patient making the ultimate decision. Doctors and nurses have the responsibility to provide detailed information. The goal of end-of-life planning is to ensure patients' dignity and respect their values.

A meaning-centered spiritual care training program for hospice palliative care teams in South Korea: development and preliminary evaluation

BACKGROUND

Spirituality is a fundamental, intrinsic aspect of human beings and should be a core component of quality palliative care. There is an urgent need to train hospice palliative care teams (HPCTs) to enhance their ability to provide spiritual care. This study aimed to develop and evaluate a meaning-centered, spiritual care training program (McSCTP) for HPCTs (McSCTP-HPCTs).

METHODS

The modules' content was informed by Viktor Frankl's meaning-centered logotherapy with its emphasis on spiritual resources, as well as the spiritual care model of the Interprofessional Spiritual Care Education Curriculum (ISPEC). Following development, we conducted a pilot test with four nurses. We used the results to inform the final program, which we tested in an intervention involving 13 members of HPCTs. We took measurements using self-administered questionnaires at three points before and after the intervention. Using descriptive statistics, the Mann-Whitney U test, and the Kruskal-Wallis test, we analyzed the participants' demographic and career-related characteristics, as well as the degree of variance between three outcome variables: compassion fatigue (CF), spiritual care competencies (SCCs), and spiritual care therapeutics (SCT).

RESULTS

We divided the McSCTP-HPCTs into five modules. Module I: The HPCTs' SCC evaluation, understanding the major concepts of spiritual care and logotherapy; Modules II-IV: Meaning-centered interventions (MCIs) related to spiritual needs (existential, relational, and transcendental/religious); Module V: The process of meaning-centered spiritual care. The preliminary evaluation revealed significant differences in all three outcome variables at the posttest point (CF, p = 0.037; SCCs, p = 0.005; SCT, p = 0.002). At the four-week follow-up test point, we only found statistical significance with the SCCs (p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

The McSCTP-HPCTs is suitable for use in clinical settings and provides evidence for assessing the SCCs of HPCTs.