The "Surprise Question" in Neurorehabilitation-Prognosis Estimation by Neurologist and Palliative Care Physician; a Longitudinal, Prospective, Observational Study

[Palliative neurology]

Palliative medicine represents the holistic multiprofessional treatment of severely and incurably ill people and their relatives, addressing their complex physical, psychological, social and spiritual needs. The central therapeutic goals are the quality of life and alleviation of suffering. In the course of many neurological diseases, high symptom burden, long and variable trajectories and unfavorable prognosis at times create a need for palliative care even at an early stage, which is currently still inadequately met. This can be countered by qualified neuropalliative care. In addition to intensifying interdisciplinary collaboration, this requires neurologists to have core competencies in palliative care. These include a team-oriented attitude, communication skills, expertise in symptom control and knowledge of biomedical ethics including palliative options at the end of life.

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.

Validation of the Surprise Question and the Development of a Multivariable Model

CONTEXT

The Surprise Question (SQ) (would you be surprised if this patient died within a year?) is a prognostic variable explored in chronic illnesses. Validation is limited to sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values.

OBJECTIVES

Our objective is to validate the SQ in cancer patients and develop a predictive model with additional variables.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study of adult (age>18) cancer patients seen between October 1, 2019, through March 31, 2021, undergoing systemic therapies had the SQ completed by oncologists prior to each change in systemic therapy. The primary outcome was survival for one year. Secondary outcomes were predictions of survival at three, six, and nine months. Patients were grouped into negative SQ (not surprised) and positive SQ (surprised). Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and likelihood ratios (LR) were calculated for the SQ. Additional prognostic variables were age, gender, cancer stage, line of therapy, Charleson Comorbid Index (CCI), palliative care consultation (prior to, after the SQ, or not at all), and healthcare utilization (outpatient, inpatient, and emergency department (ED). Logistic regression and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) were used for discrimination and modeling. Akaike information criterion (AIC) was used to compare the model fit as each predictor.

RESULTS

1366 patients had 1 SQ; 784 died within a year. The SQ predicted survival at one year (P = 0.008), with a positive LR of 1.459 (95%CI 1.316-1.602) and a c-statistic of 0.565 (95%CI 0.530-0.600). Additional variables increased the c-statistic to 0.648 (95% CI 0.608-0.686). The total model best predicted survival at three months, c-statistic of 0.663 (95% CI 0.616-0.706). However, the total model c-statistic remained <0.70.

CONCLUSIONS

The SQ, as a single factor, poorly predicts survival and should not be used to alter therapies. Adding additional objective variables improved prognostication, but further refinement and external validation are needed.

The First Neuropalliative Care Unit in Germany-Characteristics of Patients

A unique structure of care for neurological inpatients with significant palliative care (PC) needs was established in the Department of Neurology at the Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin in 2021: a specialized neuropalliative care (NPC) unit. After one year, we provide an overview of the concept and the patients' characteristics.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the characteristics of patients treated in our NPC unit between February 2021-February 2022. Data were extracted from medical records and PC assessment including diagnosis, mode of admission and discharge, length of stay, and palliative symptoms. Data are presented as averages with a 95% confidence interval [lower limit; upper limit] or percentage (absolute number).

RESULTS

We included 143 patients (52% (75) female, 67.9 years [65.6; 70.2]). Patients were admitted from general wards (48%; 68), their homes (22%; 32), intensive care units (16%; 23) or emergency departments (14%; 20). The main diagnoses were tumors of the nervous system (39%; 56), neurodegenerative diseases (30%; 43), neurologic complications (13%; 19) and cerebrovascular diseases (12%; 17). Complaints most frequently rated as severely to overwhelmingly burdensome were motor- or fatigue-associated problems, problems communicating, dysphagia and pain. The average length of stay was 13.7 days [12.2; 15.2]. Forty-five percent (64) of patients were discharged without further PC, 17% (24) were referred to a hospice and 13% (18) were discharged with outpatient PC. Five percent (7) were referred to neurorehabilitation and 21% (30) of patients died.

CONCLUSIONS

Our NPC unit is a new model of care for neurological patients with substantial PC needs especially within the structures of a highly specialized and individualized medicine.

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.

Causes for Emergency Hospitalization of Neurological Patients With Palliative Care Needs

Background: Acute and unexpected hospitalization can cause serious distress, particularly in patients with palliative care needs. Nevertheless, the majority of neurological inpatients receiving palliative care are admitted via an emergency department.

Objective: Identification of potentially avoidable causes leading to acute hospitalization of patients with neurological disorders or neurological symptoms requiring palliative care.

Methods: Retrospective analysis of medical records of all patients who were admitted via the emergency department and received palliative care in a neurological ward later on (n = 130).

Results: The main reasons for acute admission were epileptic seizures (22%), gait disorders (22%), disturbance of consciousness (20%), pain (17%), nutritional problems (17%), or paresis (14%). Possible therapy limitations, (non)existence of a patient decree, or healthcare proxy was documented in only 31%. Primary diagnoses were neoplastic (49%), neurodegenerative (30%), or cerebrovascular (18%) diseases. Fifty-nine percent were directly admitted to a neurological ward; 25% needed intensive care. On average, it took 24 h until the palliative care team was involved. In contrast to initially documented problems, key challenges identified by palliative care assessment were psychosocial problems. For 40% of all cases, a specialized palliative care could be organized.

Conclusion: Admissions were mainly triggered by acute events. Documentation of the palliative situation and treatment limitations may help to prevent unnecessary hospitalization. Although patients present with a complex symptom burden, emergency department assessment is not able to fully address multidimensionality, especially concerning psychosocial problems. Prospective investigations should develop short screening tools to identify palliative care needs of neurological patients already in the emergency department.

Akinetic mutism reversed by inferior parietal lobule repetitive theta burst stimulation: Can we restore default mode network function for therapeutic benefit?

BACKGROUND

Transcranial magnetic stimulation is a noninvasive treatment used to modulate cortical excitability. Its use over the last two decades has expanded, ranging from psychiatric disorders to traumatic brain injury and poststroke rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVES

We present the case of a 59-year-old male patient who presented in a decreased state of consciousness due to a right frontal glioblastoma, wherein his state was not improved by a successful surgery and could not be explained by any other condition. Due to his poor prognosis, we examine the benefits of receiving transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment to improve his akinetic mutism.

METHODS

We utilized independent component analysis with resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rsfMRI) to better understand his cortical functionality. The imaging suggested absence of the default mode network (DMN). The patient underwent five sessions of navigated intermittent theta burst stimulation to the ipsilesional inferior parietal lobule and inferior frontal gyrus, with the aim of improving his default mode network functionality.

RESULTS

No other treatments resulted in an improvement of this patient's condition; however, 3 weeks following transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment, the patient was more alert and interactive, and his follow-up rsfMRI scan demonstrated a partially intact default mode network.

CONCLUSION

This case raises important questions regarding the clinical utility of transcranial magnetic stimulation to improve the connectivity of important cerebral networks and subsequent related functional recovery.

Using a Modified Surprise Question as a Tool to Improve Primary Palliative Care in a Neurocritical Care Unit

BACKGROUND

Specialty palliative care is a limited resource. The surprise question ("Would you be surprised if this patient died within the next 12 months?") is a screening tool for clinicians to identify people nearing the end of life. The researchers used a modified surprise question (MSQ) to improve primary palliative care in a neurocritical care unit.

METHODS

A palliative care physician attended interdisciplinary rounds up to three days a week and asked the primary neurocritical care team, for each patient admitted in the previous 24 hours, the MSQ: "Would you be surprised if this patient died during this hospital stay?" If the response was "No," the unit social worker identified the patient's surrogate decision maker (SDM), and the primary team was encouraged to conduct a goals of care (GOC) conversation. The frequency of SDM documentation, occurrence and timing of GOC conversations, and palliative care and hospice consultations were measured for the baseline six months before the intervention, and six months after.

RESULTS

Among 350 patients admitted to the neurocritical care unit during the study, the age, gender, prehospitalization presence of advance directives, and mortality were comparable between the baseline (n = 173) and intervention (n = 177) periods. Compared to the baseline period, there was a higher frequency during the intervention period of documentation of SDM (31.8% vs. 54.2%, p = 0.00002), all GOC conversations (35.3% vs. 53.1%, p = 0.008), GOC conversations conducted by the primary team (27.2% vs. 47.5%, p = 0.00009), palliative care consultations (11.6% vs. 23.2%, p = 0.004), and hospice consultations (2.3% vs. 9.6%, p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

The MSQ can be used as a tool to identify the risk of mortality, facilitate palliative care delivered by the primary team, and improve end-of-life care.

Validation of a palliative care outcome measurement tool supplemented by neurological symptoms (HOPE+): Identification of palliative concerns of neurological patients

BACKGROUND

There is growing interest to integrate palliative care and its structures into the care of neurological patients. However, in Germany there is no comprehensive assessment tool capturing the symptoms of patients with advanced neurological diseases.

AIM

To validate a newly developed palliative care measurement tool based on an extension of the validated core documentation system Hospice and Palliative Care Evaluation considering additional neurological issues (HOPE+).

DESIGN

Prospective, observational study using HOPE+ and as external criteria, the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status and the 12 months "surprise" question (12-SQ) in a neurological population, and assessment for its construct validity and diagnostic accuracy.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

All newly admitted patients to the Department of Neurorehabilitation, Dr. Becker Rhein-Sieg-Clinic aged 18-100 years (#DRKS00010947).

RESULTS

Data from 263 patients (63 ± 14 years of age) were analyzed. HOPE+ revealed a moderately correlated six-factor structure (r = -0.543-0.525). Correlation analysis to evaluate discriminant validity using ECOG as external criterion was high (rs(261) = 0.724, p < 0.001) and confirmed for severely affected patients by adding the 12-SQ ("No"-group: 48.00 ± 14.92 vs "Yes"-group: 18.67 ± 7.57, p < 0.009). Operating characteristics show satisfactory diagnostic accuracy (area under the curve: 0.746 ± 0.049, 95% confidence interval = 0.650-0.842).

CONCLUSION

HOPE+ demonstrates promising psychometric properties. It helps to assess palliative care issues of patients in neurological settings and, in combination with the 12-SQ, conceivably conditions when to initiate the palliative care approach in a population underrepresented in palliative care structures so far.