What Patients Facing Cancer and Caregivers Want From Communication in Times of Crisis: A Qualitative Study in the Early Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

Interpersonal communication is a cornerstone of patient-centered care. We aimed to identify what patients with cancer and caregivers may want from communication during a public health crisis.

METHODS

We interviewed 15 patients (8 Veteran, 7 non-Veteran) and caregivers from regionally, racially, and ethnically diverse backgrounds across the US about serious illness care and quality of care during the COVID-19 pandemic Using an iterative, inductive and deductive process, 2 coders analyzed content associated with the code "Communication," which appeared 71 times, and identified 5 themes.

RESULTS

Participants identified as White (10), Latino/a (3), Asian (1), and Black (1). (1) Help patients and caregivers prepare for care during crisis by communicating medical information directly and proactively. (2) Explain how a crisis might influence medical recommendations and impact on recovery from illness. (3) Use key messengers to improve communication between primary teams, patients, and caregivers. (4) Include caregivers and families in communication when they cannot be physically present. (5) Foster bidirectional communication with patients and families to engage them in shared decision-making during a vulnerable time.

CONCLUSION

Communication is critical during a public health crisis yet overwhelmed clinicians may not be able to communicate effectively. Communicating with caregivers and family, transparent and timely communication, ensuring diverse providers are on the same page, and effective listening are known gaps even before the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinicians may need quick interventions, like education about goals of care, to remind them about what seriously ill patients and their caregivers want from communication and offer patient-centered care during crises.

Bolstering Advance Care Planning Measurement Using Natural Language Processing

Despite its growth as a clinical activity and research topic, the complex dynamic nature of advance care planning (ACP) has posed serious challenges for researchers hoping to quantitatively measure it. Methods for measurement have traditionally depended on lengthy manual chart abstractions or static documents (e.g., advance directive forms) even though completion of such documents is only one aspect of ACP. Natural language processing (NLP), in the form of an assisted electronic health record (EHR) review, is a technological advancement that may help researchers better measure ACP activity. In this article, we aim to show how NLP-assisted EHR review supports more accurate and robust measurement of ACP. We do so by presenting three example applications that illustrate how using NLP for this purpose supports (1) measurement in research, (2) detailed insights into ACP in quality improvement, and (3) identification of current limitations of ACP in clinical settings.

Consequences of a Health System Not Knowing Which Patients Are Deceased

This quality improvement study in a California health system investigates the proportion of active patients who were deceased but not noted as such in the electronic health record (EHR), as well as encounters after death.

Depression care quality among patients with solid tumor cancers detected to have depression in Veterans Health Administration primary care clinics

Patients with cancer, especially advanced cancer, experience depression at high rates. We aimed to evaluate the quality of depression care received by patients with solid tumor cancer and advanced solid tumor cancer in Veterans Affairs (VA) primary care clinics. This is a retrospective cohort study of patients seen in 82 VA primary care clinics who newly screened positive for depression on the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2). Outcomes included timely follow-up within 84 or 180 days (3+ mental health specialty, 3+ psychotherapy, or 3+ primary care visits with depression diagnosis codes) and minimum treatment within 1 year (60+ days antidepressants prescribed, 4+ mental health specialty visits, or 3+ psychotherapy visits). 608,042 individuals were seen in VA primary care clinics during this period; 49,839 patients (8.2%) had solid tumor cancer and 9,278 (1.5%) had advanced or poor-prognosis solid tumor cancer. For 686 observations of patients with cancer and new depression, rates of appropriate follow-up were 22.3% within 84 days and 38.2% within 180 days. For 73 observations of patients with advanced or poor-prognosis cancer and new depression, rates of appropriate follow-up were 21.9% within 84 days and 34.3% within 180 days. Rates of minimum treatment within 1 year were 68.4% and 64.4% for patients with cancer and patients with advanced or poor-prognosis cancer, respectively. Quality of timely depression management is low in patients with solid tumor cancers. Even in health systems with well-integrated mental health services, care gaps remain for patients with cancer and depression. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Association between physicians' geriatric training and patterns of end-of-life care delivered to persons with dementia

BACKGROUND

Geriatric training is designed to prepare physicians to meet the complex needs of older adults, including persons with dementia at the end-of-life (EOL) stage. We sought to compare patterns of EOL care delivered to persons with dementia between physicians with versus without geriatric training.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study of a 20% random sample of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries with dementia who died in 2016-2018 (n = 99,631). We attributed beneficiaries to a physician who had the largest number of primary care visits during the last 6 months of life and determined whether the physician was trained in geriatrics. Our outcome measures included: (i) advance care planning (ACP) and palliative care (e.g., ACP, hospice enrollment in the last 90 days of life), and (ii) high-intensity EOL care (e.g., emergency department visits or hospital admissions in the last 30 days of life).

RESULTS

Beneficiaries with dementia under the care of physicians with geriatric training had a higher proportion of ACP (adjusted proportion, 15.8% vs. 13.0%; p < 0.001 after accounting for multiple comparisons), palliative care counseling (22.4% vs. 20.9%; p = 0.01), and hospice enrollment (63.7% vs. 60.6%; p < 0.001). Geriatric training was also associated with a lower proportion of emergency department visits (55.1% vs. 59.1%; p < 0.001), hospital admissions (48.8% vs. 52.3%; p < 0.001), ICU admissions (24.9% vs. 27.4%; p < 0.001), use of mechanical ventilation (11.2% vs. 13.0%; p < 0.001), and use of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (2.1% vs. 2.4%; p = 0.03) in the last 30 days of life. There was no evidence that the placement of feeding tubes differed between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians' geriatric training was associated with the receipt of more ACP and palliative care and less intensive EOL care among persons with dementia. Provision of geriatric training for physicians may have the potential to improve the quality of EOL care delivered to persons with dementia.

Timing and setting of billed advance care planning among Medicare decedents in 2017-2019

BACKGROUND

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) began to reimburse clinicians for advance care planning (ACP) discussions, effective January 1, 2016. We sought to characterize the timing and setting of first-billed ACP discussions among Medicare decedents to inform future research on ACP billing codes.

METHODS

Using a random 20% sample of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 66 years and older who died in 2017-2019, we described the timing (relative to death) and setting (inpatient, nursing home, office, or outpatient with or without Medicare Annual Wellness Visit [AWV], home or community, or elsewhere) of the first-billed ACP discussion for each beneficiary.

RESULTS

Our study included 695,985 decedents (mean [SD] years of age, 83.2 [8.8]; 54.2% female); the proportion of decedents who had at least one billed ACP discussion increased from 9.7% in 2017 to 21.9% in 2019. We found that the proportion of first-billed ACP discussions held during the last month of life decreased from 37.0% in 2017 to 26.2% in 2019, while the proportion of first-billed ACP discussions held more than 12 months before death increased from 11.1% in 2017 to 35.2% in 2019. We also found that the proportion of first-billed ACP discussions held in the office or outpatient setting along with AWV increased over time (from 10.7% in 2017 to 14.1% in 2019), while the proportion held in the inpatient setting decreased (from 41.7% in 2017 to 38.0% in 2019).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that with increasing exposure to the CMS policy change, uptake of the ACP billing code has increased; first-billed ACP discussions are occurring sooner before the end-of-life stage and are more likely to occur with AWV. Future studies should evaluate changes in ACP practice patterns, rather than only an increasing uptake in ACP billing codes, following the policy implementation.

Support for Use of Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Communication Items Among Seriously Ill Patients

Background: High-quality doctor-patient communication is essential for patients with serious illnesses. The reliability and validity of Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) communication items among these patients are unknown. Methods: Five CAHPS communication items, a 4-item Advance Care Planning (ACP) engagement scale, 5-item confidence in others' knowledge of ACP medical wishes scale, and a question about confidence in filling out ACP-related medical forms were administered to 1100 patients (20% response rate) with serious illness receiving primary care at three University of California Health Systems. Results: Average age was 69 (range 22-102); 52% male, 18% Hispanic, 9% Asian, and 7% Black; 24% had high school or less education. Eigenvalues and internal consistency reliability (0.88) supported a 5-item communication scale. Item characteristic curves showed a monotonic relationship of response options with the communication score. Item thresholds indicated that most patients reported positive patient experiences (i.e., items were negatively skewed). Item slopes ranging from 2.52 to 5.10 confirmed that all items were strongly related to the communication score. Information (reliability) of the communication scale was higher for assessing patients with negative experiences of care than for the positive end of the spectrum. Communication was positively correlated with confidence in other's knowledge of ACP medical wishes (r = 0.32, p < 0.0001), ACP engagement (r = 0.14, p < 0.0001), and confidence in filling out ACP-related medical forms (r = 0.09, p = 0.0022). Conclusions: These findings support the use of CAHPS survey items to assess communication among patients with serious illnesses in primary care. Clinical Trial Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04012749.

Implementation Challenges for a Multisite Advance Care Planning Pragmatic Trial: Lessons Learned

BACKGROUND/PROBLEM

Advance care planning (ACP) pragmatic trials are needed.

PROPOSED SOLUTION

We determined key system-level activities to implement ACP interventions for a cluster-randomized pragmatic trial. We identified patients with serious illness from 50 primary care clinics across three University of California health systems using a validated algorithm. If patients lacked documented ACP within the last 3 years, they were eligible for an intervention: (Arm 1) an advance directive (AD); (Arm 2) AD + PREPAREforYourCare.org; (Arm 3) AD + PREPARE + lay health navigator outreach. Triggered by an appointment, we mailed and sent interventions through automated electronic health record (EHR) messaging. We collaborated with patients/caregivers, clinicians, payors, and national/health system leader advisors. We are currently finalizing 24 months follow-up data.

OUTCOMES/METHODS

We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) frameworks to track secular trends and implementation efforts.

KEY MESSAGE/RESULTS

Required multisite, system-level activities: 1) obtaining leadership, legal/privacy, and EHR approvals; 2) standardizing ACP documentation; 3) providing clinician education; 3) validating an automated serious illness identification algorithm; 4) standardizing ACP messaging with input from over 100 key advisors; 5) monitoring secular trends (e.g., COVID); and 6) standardizing ACP workflows (e.g., scanned ADs). Of 8707 patients with serious illness, 6883 were eligible for an intervention. Across all arms, 99% received the mailed intervention, 78.3% had an active patient portal (64.2% opened intervention), and 90.5% of arm three patients (n = 2243) received navigator outreach.

LESSONS LEARNED

Implementing a multisite health system-wide ACP program and pragmatic trial, with automated EHR-based cohort identification and intervention delivery, requires a high level of multidisciplinary key advisor engagement, standardization, and monitoring. These activities provide guidance for the implementation of other large-scale, population-based ACP efforts.

Telephone Outreach Enhances Recruitment of Underrepresented Seriously Ill Patients for an Advance Care Planning Pragmatic Trial

BACKGROUND

Patients experiencing systemic patterns of disadvantage, such as racial/ethnic minorities and those with limited English proficiency, are underrepresented in research. This is particularly true for large pragmatic trials of potentially sensitive research topics, such as advance care planning (ACP). It is unclear how phone outreach may affect research participation by underrepresented individuals.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of phone outreach, in addition to standard mail survey recruitment, in a population-based ACP pragmatic trial at three academic health systems in California.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study PATIENTS: Primary care patients with serious illness were mailed a survey in their preferred language. Patients who did not initially respond by mail received up to three reminder phone calls with the option of survey completion by phone.

MAIN MEASURES

Effect of phone outreach on survey response rate associated with respondent demographic characteristics (e.g., Social Vulnerability Index [SVI], range 0 (low) to 1 (high)).

RESULTS

Across the health systems, 5998 seriously ill patients were mailed surveys. We obtained completed surveys from 1215 patients (20% response rate); 787 (65%) responded after mail alone and 428 (35%) participated only after phone outreach. Patients recruited after phone outreach compared to mail alone were more socially vulnerable (SVI 0.41 v 0.35, P < 0.001), were more likely to report being a racial/ethnic minority (35% v 28%, P = 0.006), and non-English speaking (16% v 10%, P = 0.005). Age and gender did not differ significantly. The inclusion of phone outreach resulted in a sample that better represented the baseline population than mail alone in racial/ethnic minority (28% mail alone, 30% including phone outreach, 36% baseline population), non-English language preference (10%, 12%, 15%, respectively), and SVI (0.35, 0.37, 0.38, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Phone outreach for a population-based survey in a pragmatic trial concerning a potentially sensitive topic significantly enhanced recruitment of underrepresented seriously ill patients.

Dementia and electronic health record phenotypes: a scoping review of available phenotypes and opportunities for future research

OBJECTIVE

We performed a scoping review of algorithms using electronic health record (EHR) data to identify patients with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD), to advance their use in research and clinical care.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Starting with a previous scoping review of EHR phenotypes, we performed a cumulative update (April 2020 through March 1, 2023) using Pubmed, PheKB, and expert review with exclusive focus on ADRD identification. We included algorithms using EHR data alone or in combination with non-EHR data and characterized whether they identified patients at high risk of or with a current diagnosis of ADRD.

RESULTS

For our cumulative focused update, we reviewed 271 titles meeting our search criteria, 49 abstracts, and 26 full text papers. We identified 8 articles from the original systematic review, 8 from our new search, and 4 recommended by an expert. We identified 20 papers describing 19 unique EHR phenotypes for ADRD: 7 algorithms identifying patients with diagnosed dementia and 12 algorithms identifying patients at high risk of dementia that prioritize sensitivity over specificity. Reference standards range from only using other EHR data to in-person cognitive screening.

CONCLUSION

A variety of EHR-based phenotypes are available for use in identifying populations with or at high-risk of developing ADRD. This review provides comparative detail to aid in choosing the best algorithm for research, clinical care, and population health projects based on the use case and available data. Future research may further improve the design and use of algorithms by considering EHR data provenance.

Surgeon-reported Factors Influencing Adoption of Quality Standards for Goal-concordant Care in Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Qualitative Study

OBJECTIVE

This study explored surgical oncologists' perspectives on factors influencing adoption of quality standards in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND

The American College of Surgeons Geriatric Surgery Verification Program includes communication standards designed to facilitate goal-concordant care, yet little is known about how surgeons believe these standards align with clinical practice.

METHODS

Semistructured video-based interviews were conducted from November 2020 to January 2021 with academic surgical oncologists purposively sampled based on demographics, region, palliative care certification, and years in practice. Interviews addressed: (1) adherence to standards documenting care preferences for life-sustaining treatment, surrogate decision-maker, and goals of surgery; and (2) factors influencing their adoption into practice. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, qualitatively analyzed, and conducted until thematic saturation was reached.

RESULTS

Twenty-six surgeons participated (57.7% male, 8.5 mean years in practice, 19.2% palliative care board-certified). Surgeons reported low adherence to documenting care preferences and surrogate decision-maker and high adherence to discussing, but not documenting, goals of surgery. Participants held conflicting views about the relevance of care preferences to preoperative conversations and surrogate decision-maker documentation by the surgeon and questioned the direct connection between documentation of quality standards and higher value patient care. Key themes regarding factors influencing adoption of quality standards included organizational culture, workflow, and multidisciplinary collaboration.

CONCLUSIONS

Although surgeons routinely discuss goals of surgery, documentation is inconsistent; care preferences and surrogate decision-makers are rarely discussed or documented. Adherence to these standards would be facilitated by multidisciplinary collaboration, institutional standardization, and evidence linking standards to higher value care.

Patient-Reported Quality Measures for Palliative Care: The Time is now

CONTEXT

While progress has been made in the ability to measure the quality of hospice and specialty palliative care, there are notable gaps. A recent analysis conducted by Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) revealed a paucity of patient-reported measures, particularly in palliative care domains such as symptom management and communication.

OBJECTIVES

The research team, consisting of quality measure and survey developers, psychometricians, and palliative care clinicians, used established state-of-the art methods for developing and testing patient-reported measures.

METHODS

We applied a patient-centered, patient-engaged approach throughout the development and testing process. This sequential process included 1) an information gathering phase; 2) a pre-testing phase; 3) a testing phase; and 4) an endorsement phase.

RESULTS

To fill quality measure gaps identified during the information gathering phase, we selected two draft measures ("Feeling Heard and Understood" and "Receiving Desired Help for Pain") for testing with patients receiving palliative care in clinic-based settings. In the pre-testing phase, we used an iterative process of cognitive interviews to refine draft items and corresponding response options for the proposed measures. The alpha pilot test supported establishment of protocols for the national beta field test. Measures met conventional criteria for reliability, had strong face and construct validity, and there was diversity in program level scores. The measures received National Quality Forum (NQF) endorsement.

CONCLUSION

These measures highlight the key role of patient voices in palliative care and fill a much-needed gap for patient-reported experience measures in our field.

Integrating Patient and Expert Perspectives to Conceptualize High-Quality Palliative Cancer Care for Symptoms in the US Veterans Health Administration: A Qualitative Study

Quality measurement is typically the domain of clinical experts and health system leaders; patient/caregiver perspectives are rarely solicited. We aimed to describe and integrate clinician and patient/caregiver conceptualizations of high-quality palliative symptom care for patients receiving care for advanced cancer within the US Veterans Health Administration in the context of existing quality measures. We conducted a secondary qualitative analysis of transcripts from prioritization discussions of process quality measures relevant to cancer palliative care. These discussions occurred during 2 modified RAND-UCLA appropriateness panels: a panel of 10 palliative care clinical expert stakeholders (7 physicians, 2 nurses, 1 social worker) and a panel of 9 patients/caregivers with cancer experience. Discussions were recorded, transcribed, and independently double-coded using an a priori logical framework. Content analysis was used to identify subthemes within codes and axial coding was used to identify crosscutting themes. Patients/caregivers and clinical experts contributed important perspectives to 3 crosscutting themes. First, proactive elicitation of symptoms is critical. Patients/caregivers especially emphasized importance of comprehensive and proactive screening and assessment, especially for pain and mental health. Second, screening and assessment alone is not enough; information elicited from patients must inform care. Measuring screening/assessment and management care processes separately has important limitations. Lastly, high-quality symptom management can be broadly defined if it is patient-centered; high-quality care takes an individualized approach and might include non-medical or non-pharmacological symptom management. Integrating the perspectives of clinical experts and patients/caregivers is critical for health systems to consider as they design and implement quality measures for palliative cancer care.

The 3 Wishes Program Improves Families' Experience of Emotional and Spiritual Support at the End of Life

BACKGROUND

The end-of-life (EOL) experience in the intensive care unit (ICU) is emotionally challenging, and there are opportunities for improvement. The 3 Wishes Program (3WP) promotes the dignity of dying patients and their families by eliciting and implementing wishes at the EOL.

AIM

To assess whether the 3WP is associated with improved ratings of EOL care.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

In the 3WP, clinicians elicit and fulfill simple wishes for dying patients and their families.

SETTING

2-hospital academic healthcare system.

PARTICIPANTS

Dying patients in the ICU and their families.

PROGRAM EVALUATION

A modified Bereaved Family Survey (BFS), a validated tool for measuring EOL care quality, was completed by families of ICU decedents approximately 3 months after death. We compared patients whose care involved the 3WP to those who did not using three BFS-derived measures: Respectful Care and Communication (5 questions), Emotional and Spiritual Support (3 questions), and the BFS-Performance Measure (BFS-PM, a single-item global measure of care).

RESULTS

Of 314 completed surveys, 117 were for patients whose care included the 3WP. Bereaved families of 3WP patients rated the Emotional and Spiritual Support factor significantly higher (7.5 vs. 6.0, p = 0.003, adjusted p = 0.001) than those who did not receive the 3WP. The Respectful Care and Communication factor and BFS-PM were no different between groups.

DISCUSSION

The 3WP is a low-cost intervention that may be a feasible strategy for improving the EOL experience.

A pragmatic parallel arm randomized-controlled trial of a multi-pronged electronic health record-based clinical decision support tool protocol to reduce low-value antipsychotic prescriptions among older adults with Alzheimer's and related dementias

Among patients with Alzheimer's disease and its related dementias (ADRD) with behavioral disturbances, antipsychotic prescriptions have limited efficacy and increase the risk of death. Yet, physicians continue to routinely prescribe low-value antipsychotic medications for behavioral disturbances among patients with ADRD. We designed a pragmatic randomized-controlled trial to measure the impact of a behavioral economic electronic health record (EHR) clinical decision support (CDS) intervention to reduce physician prescriptions of new antipsychotic medications among patients with ADRD. Utilizing a pragmatic parallel arm randomized-controlled trial design, the study will randomize eligible physicians from a large academic health system to either receive a EHR CDS intervention or not (control) when they prescribe a new antipsychotic medication during visits with patients with ADRD. The intervention will include three components: 1) alerts prescribers that antipsychotic prescriptions increase mortality risk (motivating physicians' intrinsic desire for non-malfeasance); 2) offers non-pharmacological behavioral resources for caregivers; 3) auto-defaults the prescription to contain the lowest dose and number of pill-days (n = 30) without refills if the prescriber does not cancel the order (appealing to default bias). Over 1 year, we will compare the cumulative total of new antipsychotic pill-days prescribed (primary outcome) by physicians in the intervention group versus in the control group. The study protocol meets international SPIRIT guidelines. Behavioral economics, or the study of human behavior as a function of more than rational incentives, considering a whole host of cognitive and social psychological preferences, tendencies, and biases, is increasingly recognized as an important conceptual framework to improve physician behavior. This pragmatic trial is among the first to combine two distinct behavioral economic principles, a desire for non-malfeasance and default bias, to improve physician prescribing patterns for patients with ADRD. We anticipate this trial will substantially advance understanding of how behavioral-economic informed EHR CDS tools can potentially reduce harmful, low-value care among patients with ADRD.

Seriously Ill Patients' Prioritized Goals and Their Clinicians' Perceptions of Those Goals

CONTEXT

Seriously ill patients whose prioritized healthcare goals are understood by their clinicians are likely better positioned to receive goal-concordant care.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the proportion of seriously ill patients whose prioritized healthcare goal is accurately perceived by their clinician and identify factors associated with accurate perception.

METHODS

Secondary analysis of a multicenter cluster-randomized trial of outpatients with serious illness and their clinicians. Approximately two weeks after a clinic visit, patients reported their current prioritized healthcare goal- extending life over relief of pain and discomfort, or relief of pain and discomfort over extending life - and clinicians reported their perception of their patients' current prioritized healthcare goal; matching these items defined accurate perception.

RESULTS

Of 252 patients with a prioritized healthcare goal, 60% had their goal accurately perceived by their clinician, 27% were cared for by clinicians who perceived prioritization of the alternative goal, and 13% had their clinician answer unsure. Patients who were older (OR 1.03 per year; 95%CI 1.01, 1.05), had stable goals (OR 2.52; 95%CI 1.26, 5.05), and had a recent goals-of-care discussion (OR 1.78, 95%CI 1.00, 3.16) were more likely to have their goals accurately perceived.

CONCLUSION

A majority of seriously ill outpatients are cared for by clinicians who accurately perceive their patients' prioritized healthcare goals. However, a substantial portion are not and may be at higher risk for goal-discordant care. Interventions that facilitate goals-of-care discussions may help align care with goals, as recent discussions were associated with accurate perceptions of patients' prioritized goals.

Two mental models of integrated care for advanced liver disease: qualitative study of multidisciplinary health professionals

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this paper is to present two divergent mental models of integrated advanced liver disease (AdvLD) care among 26 providers who treat patients with AdvLD.

SETTING

3 geographically dispersed United States Veterans Health Administration health systems.

PARTICIPANTS

26 professionals (20 women and 6 men) participated, including 9 (34.6%) gastroenterology, hepatology, and transplant physicians, 2 (7.7%) physician assistants, 7 (27%) nurses and nurse practitioners, 3 (11.5%) social workers and psychologists, 4 (15.4%) palliative care providers and 1 (3.8%) pharmacist.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We conducted qualitative in-depth interviews of providers caring for patients with AdvLD. We used framework analysis to identify two divergent mental models of integrated AdvLD care. These models vary in timing of initiating various constituents of care, philosophy of integration, and supports and resources needed to achieve each model.

RESULTS

Clinicians described integrated care as an approach that incorporates elements of curative care, symptom and supportive care, advance care planning and end-of-life services from a multidisciplinary team. Analysis revealed two mental models that varied in how and when these constituents are delivered. One mental model involves sequential transitions between constituents of care, and the second mental model involves synchronous application of the various constituents. Participants described elements of teamwork and coordination supports necessary to achieve integrated AdvLD care. Many discussed the importance of having a multidisciplinary team integrating supportive care, symptom management and palliative care with liver disease care.

CONCLUSIONS

Health professionals agree on the constituents of integrated AdvLD care but describe two competing mental models of how these constituents are integrated. Health systems can promote integrated care by assembling multidisciplinary teams, and providing teamwork and coordination supports, and training that facilitates patient-centred AdvLD care.

The chosen and the unchosen: How eligibility for liver transplant influences the lived experiences of patients with advanced liver disease

Advanced liver disease is often uncurable and fatal. Liver transplant is the only curative option for patients with advanced, irreversible liver disease, but the need for new livers far exceeds the supply. Patients with the greatest need as well as the greatest likelihood of benefit, based on a complex array of biomedical and psychosocial considerations, are prioritized for transplant. The opportunity to receive a life-saving surgery no doubt has enormous consequences for patients and their healthcare providers, as does the absence of that opportunity. But these consequences are poorly characterized, especially for patients deemed poor candidates for liver transplant. Through in-depth interviews with patients living with advanced liver disease and the providers who care for them, we explore how eligibility status affects illness experiences, including patients' interactions with clinicians, knowledge about their disease, expectations for the future, and efforts to come to terms with a life-limiting illness. We describe how the clinical and social requirements needed to secure eligibility for liver transplant lend themselves to a clinical and cultural logic that delineates "worthy" and "unworthy" patients. We describe how providers and candidates discuss the possibility of moral redemption for such patients through transplant surgeries, a discourse notably absent among patients not eligible for transplant.

Medical oncologists' perspectives of end-of-life care communication with racial/ethnic minority and limited English proficiency patients

e18585

Background: Racial/ethnic minority (REM) and limited English proficiency (LEP) patients with cancer receive more intensive treatment at the end-of-life (EOL) compared to non-Hispanic whites. Various factors at the health system, patient, and provider level contribute to this disparity. While some data exists on the role of provider communication, little is known about medical oncologists' knowledge and attitudes regarding EOL care communication with REM and LEP patients with cancer. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional, anonymous, pilot survey of medical oncology attendings and fellows at one academic center. Over 3 months, 57 individuals were invited to participate. The survey addressed 6 domains about EOL care communication with REM and LEP patients (role of language, barriers, facilitators, provider beliefs, provider communication skills, and cultural competency training). Questions used Likert scales and were modified from previously validated items when possible. Results: Of 35 individual respondents (61% response rate) 21 (60%) were male, 14 (40%) were female, and 29 (83%) were attendings. Average participant age was 42 years (range 31-60 years) and average years in practice was 9 (range 2-25 years). Twenty-three (66%) self-identified as non-Hispanic white, 11 (31%) as Asian, and 1 (3%) as other. Thirty-three (94%) reported their primary language as English and 23 (66%) reported speaking a second language. A majority (77%) strongly agreed discussing EOL care is part of an oncologist’s job and 69% strongly agreed patients with cancer, regardless of race/ethnicity or English language ability, should be engaged in EOL care discussions. Among several facilitators identified, two most highly rated as “Very Important” were eliciting patient belief systems about their disease (71%) and about death/dying (69%). However, only 14% strongly agreed they ask patients their beliefs about death/dying, and a minority strongly agreed they feel comfortable having EOL care discussions with REM (34%) and LEP (29%) patients. Importantly, 77% rated themselves at 6 or 7 (on a scale from 0 to 10, with 10 being the best) in how well they currently communicate about EOL care with REM and LEP patients, 74% reported wanting to be at 8 or 9 in 6 months, and 89% completely or somewhat agreed with wanting help to improve. Conclusions: Our results suggest there is conceptual understanding among academic medical oncologists of the need to engage all patients in EOL care discussions and elicit patient belief systems on the topic. Though there is lack of comfort in having EOL care discussions with REM and LEP patients, and infrequent inquiry about patient belief systems, there is also motivation to improve communication skills in this area. Interventions that foster medical oncologists' comfort and skills in cross-cultural, language non-congruent communication about EOL care are needed.

Patient and Caregiver Prioritization of Palliative and End-of-Life Cancer Care Quality Measures

BACKGROUND

Development and prioritization of quality measures typically relies on experts in clinical medicine, but patients and their caregivers may have different perspectives on quality measurement priorities.

OBJECTIVE

To inform priorities for health system implementation of palliative cancer and end-of-life care quality measures by eliciting perspectives of patients and caregivers.

DESIGN

Using modified RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Panel methods and materials tailored for knowledgeable lay participants, we convened a panel to rate cancer palliative care process quality measure concepts before and after a 1-day, in-person meeting.

PARTICIPANTS

Nine patients and caregivers with experience living with or caring for patients with cancer.

MAIN MEASURES

Panelists rated each concept on importance for providing patient- and family-centered care on a nine-point scale and each panelist nominated five highest priority measure concepts ("top 5").

KEY RESULTS

Cancer patient and caregiver panelists rated all measure concepts presented as highly important to patient- and family- centered care (median rating ≥ 7) in pre-panel (mean rating range, 6.9-8.8) and post-panel ratings (mean rating range, 7.2-8.9). Forced choice nominations of the "top 5" helped distinguish similarly rated measure concepts. Measure concepts nominated into the "top 5" by three or more panelists included two measure concepts of communication (goals of care discussions and discussion of prognosis), one measure concept on providing comprehensive assessments of patients, and three on symptoms including pain management plans, improvement in pain, and depression management plans. Patients and caregivers nominated one additional measure concept (pain screening) back into consideration, bringing the total number of measure concepts under consideration to 21.

CONCLUSIONS

Input from cancer patients and caregivers helped identify quality measurement priorities for health system implementation. Forced choice nominations were useful to discriminate concepts with the highest perceived importance. Our approach serves as a model for incorporating patient and caregiver priorities in quality measure development and implementation.

Quality measures in HCC care by the Practice Metrics Committee of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases

The burden of HCC is substantial. To address gaps in HCC care, the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) Practice Metrics Committee (PMC) aimed to develop a standard set of process-based measures and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) along the HCC care continuum. We identified candidate process and outcomes measures for HCC care based on structured literature review. A 13-member panel with content expertise across the HCC care continuum evaluated candidate measures on importance and performance gap using a modified Delphi approach (two rounds of rating) to define the final set of measures. Candidate PROs based on a structured scoping review were ranked by 74 patients with HCC across 7 diverse institutions. Out of 135 measures, 29 measures made the final set. These covered surveillance (6 measures), diagnosis (6 measures), staging (2 measures), treatment (10 measures), and outcomes (5 measures). Examples included the use of ultrasound (± alpha-fetoprotein [AFP]) every 6 months, need for surveillance in high-risk populations, diagnostic testing for patients with a new AFP elevation, multidisciplinary liver tumor board (MLTB) review of Liver Imaging-Reporting and Data System 4 lesions, standard evaluation at diagnosis, treatment recommendations based on Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging, MLTB discussion of treatment options, appropriate referral for evaluation of liver transplantation candidacy, and role of palliative therapy. PROs include those related to pain, anxiety, fear of treatment, and uncertainty about the best individual treatment and the future. The AASLD PMC has developed a set of explicit quality measures in HCC care to help bridge the gap between guideline recommendations and measurable processes and outcomes. Measurement and subsequent implementation of these metrics could be a central step in the improvement of patient care and outcomes in this high-risk population.

Trends in advance care planning and end-of-life care among persons living with dementia requiring surrogate decision-making

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have demonstrated positive impacts of advance care planning (ACP) on end-of-life (EOL) care. We sought to examine trends in ACP and EOL care intensity among persons living with dementia who required surrogate decision-making in their final days of life.

METHODS

We analyzed the participants of the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), a nationally representative longitudinal panel study of U.S. residents, with dementia 70 years and older who required surrogate decision-making in the final days of life and died between 2000 and 2014. Based on surrogate reports after the death of a participant, our study measured the completion of three specific types of patient-engaged ACP (written EOL care instructions, assignment of a durable power of attorney for healthcare, patient engagement in EOL care discussions) and four measures of EOL care in the final days of life (death in hospital, receipt of life-prolonging treatments, limiting or withholding certain treatments, and receipt of comfort-oriented care). All analyses accounted for the complex survey design of HRS.

RESULTS

Among 870 adults (weighted N = 2,812,380) with dementia who died in 2000-2014 and required surrogate decision-making at EOL, only 34.8% of patients participated in all three aspects of ACP, and there was not a significant increase in ACP completion between 2000 and 2014. The receipt of life-prolonging treatments in the final days of life has increased over time (adjusted change per year, 1.4 percentage points [pp]; 95% CI, 0.5 to 2.2 pp; P-for-trend = 0.002), while the percentage of death in hospital, limiting or withholding certain treatments, or comfort-oriented care did not change.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that the rates of ACP completion have not increased over time despite its potential benefits and life-prolonging treatments are still common among PLWD who require surrogate decision-making, a population who might benefit greatly from early ACP.

Improving Serious Illness Care for Surgical Patients: Quality Indicators for Surgical Palliative Care

OBJECTIVE

Develop quality indicators that measure access to and the quality of primary PC delivered to seriously ill surgical patients.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

PC for seriously ill surgical patients, including aligning treatments with patients' goals and managing symptoms, is associated with improved patient-oriented outcomes and decreased healthcare utilization. However, efforts to integrate PC alongside restorative surgical care are limited by a lack of surgical quality indicators to evaluate primary PC delivery.

METHODS

We developed a set of 27 preliminary indicators that measured palliative processes of care across the surgical episode, including goals of care, decision-making, symptom assessment, and issues related to palliative surgery. Then using the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness method, a 12-member expert advisory panel rated the validity (primary outcome) and feasibility of each indicator twice: (1) remotely and (2) after an in-person moderated discussion.

RESULTS

After 2 rounds of rating, 24 indicators were rated as valid, covering the preoperative evaluation (9 indicators), immediate preoperative readiness (2 indicators), intraoperative (1 indicator), postoperative (8 indicators), and end of life (4 indicators) phases of surgical care.

CONCLUSIONS

This set of quality indicators provides a comprehensive set of process measures that possess the potential to measure high quality PC for seriously ill surgical patients throughout the surgical episode.

Impact of a Palliative Care Nurse Practitioner in an Oncology Clinic: A Quality Improvement Effort

PURPOSE

Guidelines support early integration of palliative care (PC) into standard oncology practice; however, little is known as to whether outcomes can be improved by modifying health care delivery in a real-world setting.

METHODS

We report our 6-year experience of embedding a nurse practitioner in an oncology clinic (March 2014-March 2020) to integrate early, concurrent advance care planning and PC.

RESULTS

Compared with patients with advanced cancer not enrolled in the palliative care nurse practitioner program, in March 2020, patients who are enrolled are more likely to have higher quality of PC (eg, goals of care note documentation [82% v 15%; P < .01], referral to the psychosocial oncology program [67% v 37%; P < .01], and referral to hospice [61% v 34%; P < .01]) and less inpatient utilization in the last 6 months of life (eg, hospital days [12 v 18; P < .01] and intensive care unit days [1.2 v 2.3; P < .01]). The program expanded over time with the support of faculty skills training for advance care planning and PC, supporting a shared mental model of PC delivery within the oncology clinic.

CONCLUSION

Embedding a trained palliative care nurse practitioner in oncology clinics to deliver early integrated PC can lead to improved quality of care for patients with advanced cancer.

Quality Indicators in Surgical Palliative Care: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Defining high quality palliative care in seriously ill surgical patients is essential to provide patient-centered surgical care. Quality indicators specifically for seriously ill surgical patients are necessary in order to integrate palliative care into existing surgical quality improvement programs.

OBJECTIVES

To identify existing quality indicators that measure palliative care delivery in seriously ill surgical patients, characterize their development, and assess their methodological quality.

METHODS

A PRISMA-guided systematic review included studies that reported on the development process and characteristics of palliative care quality indicators and guidelines in adult surgical patients. Relevant measures were categorized into the previously defined National Consensus Project domains of palliative care and the Donabedian quality framework, and assessed for methodological quality.

RESULTS

There were 263 unique measures identified from 26 studies, of which 70% were process measures. Indicators addressing Care of the Patient Near the End of Life (31.5%) and Physical Aspects of Care (20.8%) were the most common. Indicators addressing Spiritual (2.6%) and Cultural Aspects of Care (1.2%) were the least common. Methodological quality varied widely across studies. Although most studies defined a purpose for the indicators and used scientific evidence, many studies lacked input from target populations and few had discussed the practical application of indicators.

CONCLUSION

This review was a key step that informed efforts to develop quality indicators for seriously ill surgical patients. Few indicators addressed non-physical aspects of suffering and no indicators were identified addressing palliative surgery. Future attention is needed toward the development and practical application of palliative care quality indicators in surgical patients.

Exploring expanded interdisciplinary roles in goals of care conversations in a national goals of care initiative: A qualitative approach

BACKGROUND

The United States Veterans Health Administration National Center for Ethics in Health Care implemented the Life-Sustaining Treatment Decisions Initiative throughout the Veterans Health Administration health care system in 2017. This policy encourages goals of care conversations, referring to conversations about patient's treatment and end-of-life wishes for life-sustaining treatments, among Veterans with serious illnesses. A key component of the initiative is expanding interdisciplinary provider roles in having goals of care conversations.

AIM

Use organizational role theory to explore medical center experiences with expanding interdisciplinary roles in the implementation of a goals of care initiative.

DESIGN

A qualitative thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Initial participants were recruited using purposive sampling of local medical center champions. Snowball sampling identified additional participants. Participants included thirty-one interdisciplinary providers from 12 geographically diverse initiative pilot and spread medical centers.

RESULTS

Five themes were identified. Expanding provider roles in goals of care conversations (1) involves organizational culture change; (2) is influenced by medical center leadership; (3) is supported by provider role readiness; (4) benefits from cross-disciplinary role agreement; and (5) can "overwhelm" providers.

CONCLUSIONS

Organizational role theory is a helpful framework for exploring interdisciplinary roles in a goals of care initiative. Support and recognition of provider role expansion in goals of care conversations was important for the adoption of a goals of care initiative. Actionable strategies, including multi-level leadership support and the use of interdisciplinary champions, facilitate role change and have potential to strengthen uptake of a goals of care initiative.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Palliative Care, Version 2.2021

Palliative care has evolved to be an integral part of comprehensive cancer care with the goal of early intervention to improve quality of life and patient outcomes. The NCCN Guidelines for Palliative Care provide recommendations to help the primary oncology team promote the best quality of life possible throughout the illness trajectory for each patient with cancer. The NCCN Palliative Care Panel meets annually to evaluate and update recommendations based on panel members' clinical expertise and emerging scientific data. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel's recent discussions and highlights updates on the importance of fostering adaptive coping strategies for patients and families, and on the role of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions to optimize symptom management.

Radiation Oncology Program Directors' Attitudes Toward Twenty-Seven Discrete Palliative Care Skills

Background: We evaluated radiation oncology residency program directors' attitudes toward discrete palliative care skills in effort to determine which skills should be prioritized in radiation oncology resident training. Design: We identified 93 U.S. radiation oncology residency program directors and sent them a survey through e-mail. The survey assessed views of 27 discrete palliative care skills in eight domains and was adapted from the American Society of Clinical Oncology/American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine Guidance Statement defining high-quality primary palliative care in medical oncology. Using a nine-point scale, respondents rated each skill on three constructs: (1) importance to high-quality cancer care, (2) relevance of the skill to radiation oncology practice, and (3) importance to radiation oncology residency education. Skills were categorized as "Include" (median score ≥7 for all constructs), "Exclude" (median score ≤3 for all constructs), or "Uncertain" (all other skills) using a composite score of all constructs. Results: Twenty-nine program directors (response rate 31%) completed the survey. Of the 27 skills, 100% were rated as highly important to high-quality cancer care, 70% were rated as highly relevant to radiation oncology practice, and 81% were rated as highly important to resident education (median score ≥7). Using the composite score, 70% of skills were categorized as "Include." The domains of Caregiver Support (100%), End-of-Life Care (66%), and Spiritual/Cultural Assessment and Management (33%) had the highest proportions of skills rated as "Uncertain." Conclusions: The surveyed radiation oncology residency program directors generally value palliative care skills within radiation oncology.

Deficits in Advance Care Planning for Patients With Decompensated Cirrhosis at Liver Transplant Centers

IMPORTANCE

The burden of end-of-life care for patients with cirrhosis is increasing in the US, and most of these patients, many of whom are not candidates for liver transplant, die in institutions receiving aggressive care. Advance care planning (ACP) has been associated with improved end-of-life outcomes for patients with other chronic illnesses, but it has not been well-characterized in patients with decompensated cirrhosis.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the experience of ACP in patients with decompensated cirrhosis at liver transplant centers.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

For this multicenter qualitative study, face-to-face semistructured interviews were conducted between July 1, 2017, and May 30, 2018, with clinicians and patients with decompensated cirrhosis at 3 high-volume transplant centers in California. Patient participants were adults and had a diagnosis of cirrhosis, at least 1 portal hypertension-related complication, and current or previous Model for End-Stage Liver Disease with sodium score of 15 or higher. Clinician participants were health care professionals who provided care during the illness trajectory.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Experiences with ACP reported by patients and clinicians. Participants were asked about the context, behaviors, thoughts, and decisions concerning elements of ACP, such as prognosis, health care preferences, values and goals, surrogate decision-making, and documentation.

RESULTS

The study included 42 patients (mean [SD] age, 58.2 [11.2] years; 28 men [67%]) and 46 clinicians (13 hepatologists [28%], 11 transplant coordinators [24%], 9 hepatobiliary surgeons [20%], 6 social workers [13%], 5 hepatology nurse practitioners [11%], and 2 critical care physicians [4%]). Five themes that represent the experiences of ACP were identified: (1) most patient consideration of values, goals, and preferences occurred outside outpatient visits; (2) optimistic attitudes from transplant teams hindered the discussions about dying; (3) clinicians primarily discussed death as a strategy for encouraging behavioral change; (4) transplant teams avoided discussing nonaggressive treatment options with patients; and (5) surrogate decision makers were unprepared for end-of-life decision-making.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found that, despite a guarded prognosis, patients with decompensated cirrhosis had inadequate ACP throughout the trajectory of illness until the end of life. This finding may explain excessively aggressive life-sustaining treatment that patients receive at the end of life.

Top Ten Tips Palliative Care Clinicians Should Know About End-Stage Liver Disease

End-stage liver disease (ESLD) is an increasingly prevalent condition with high morbidity and mortality, especially for those ineligible for liver transplantation. Patients with ESLD, along with their family caregivers, have significant needs related to their quality of life, and there is increasing attention being paid to integration of palliative care (PC) principles into routine care throughout the disease spectrum. To provide upstream care for these patients and their family caregivers, it is essential for PC providers to understand their complex psychosocial and physical needs and to be aware of the unique challenges around medical decision making and end-of-life care for this patient population. This article, written by a team of liver and PC experts, shares 10 high-yield tips to help PC clinicians provide better care for patients with advanced liver disease.

Expert Stakeholder Prioritization of Process Quality Measures to Achieve Patient- and Family-Centered Palliative and End-of-Life Cancer Care

Importance: Quality measures of palliative and end-of-life care relevant to patients with advanced cancer have been developed, but few are in routine use. It is unclear which of these measures are most important for providing patient- and family-centered care and have high potential for improving quality of care. Objective: To prioritize process quality measures for assessing delivery of patient- and family-centered palliative and end-of-life cancer care in US Veterans Affairs (VA) health care facilities. Design, Setting, Participants: A panel of 10 palliative and cancer care expert stakeholders (7 physicians, 2 nurses, 1 social worker) rated process quality measure concepts before and after a 1-day meeting. Measures: Panelists rated 64 measure concepts on a nine-point scale on: (1) importance to providing patient- and family-centered care, and (2) potential for quality improvement (QI). Panelists also nominated five highest priority measure concepts ("top 5") on each attribute. Results: Panelists rated most measure concepts (54 premeeting, 56 post-meeting) as highly important to patient- and family-centered care (median rating ≥7). Considerably fewer (17 premeeting, 22 post-meeting) were rated as having high potential for QI. Measure concepts having postpanel median ratings ≥7 and nominated by one or more panelists as "top 5" on either attribute comprised a shortlist of 20 measure concepts. Conclusions: A panel of expert stakeholders helped prioritize 64 measure concepts into a shortlist of 20. Half of the shortlisted measures were related to communication about patient preferences and decision making, and half were related to symptom assessment and treatment.

Implementing Goals-of-Care Conversations: Lessons From High- and Low-Performing Sites From a VA National Initiative

CONTEXT

The Veterans Health Administration (VA) National Center for Ethics in Healthcare implemented the Life-Sustaining Treatment Decisions Initiative, including policy and practice standards, clinician communication training, a documentation template, and central implementation support to foster advance care planning via goals-of-care conversations for seriously ill veterans in 2014, spreading nationally to other Veterans Health Affairs (VA) sites in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

Our goal was to describe the range of early implementation experiences among the pilot sites, and compare them with spread sites that implemented LSTDI about two years later, identifying cross-site best practices and pitfalls.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with 32 key stakeholders from 12 sites to identify cross-site best practices and pitfalls related to implementation.

RESULTS

Three primary implementation themes emerged: organizational readiness for transformation, importance of champions, and time and resources needed to achieve implementation. Each theme's barriers and facilitators highlighted variability in success based on complexity in terms of vertical hierarchy and horizontal cross-role/cross-clinic relationships.

CONCLUSION

Learning health care systems need multilevel interdisciplinary implementation approaches to support communication about serious illness, from broad-based system-level training and education to build communication skills, to focusing on characteristics of successful individual champions who listen to critics and are tenacious in addressing concerns.

Cost-health literacy training in fellowship: A QI initiative

80

Background: Limited cost-health literacy is a significant factor in the physicians ability to discuss and navigate patient financial concerns. Because these skills are not formally taught during training, the cost-health literacy of graduate medical trainees is unknown. This study describes a QI initiative to measure and improve upon the cost-health literacy skills of oncology fellows as it pertains to objective knowledge and self-perceived cost communication practices. Methods: All oncology fellows (n = 19) at the University of California, Los Angeles were invited to participate in QI project during the fall of 2019. Fellows participated in a case-based curriculum over three months, consisting of a group didactic on financial toxicity (45 minutes) and an interactive case based learning scenario that highlighted financial toxicity risk factors and areas for intervention (30 minutes). We concluded with a group discussion (30 minutes) to review and consolidate strategies, identfying internal and external resources that enable physicians to navigate financial toxicity in direct patient care. A cost-health literacy survey was administered at baseline and at the conclusion of the curriculum to evaluate the impact of the program. Results: Of 19 participants, 17 participated and 16 completed both the pre and post survey. These 16 were included in the analysis. After the intervention, participants were more likely to report comfort discussing out of pocket costs (50% v 19%, p = 0.005) and to feel they could help a patient experiencing financial toxicity (62% v 6%, p = 0.005). Fellows were more likely to report awareness of resources that were available to them to help patients manage financial toxicity (69% v 19%, p 0.003) but were no more likely to report asking patients about their subjective distress due to treatment related costs (57% v 50%, p = 0.759). Conclusions: We can teach and improve upon cost-health literacy skills through participation in a targeted, brief curriculum. Further studies are warranted to determine how this approach can be applied in other settings and how it objectively impacts cost communication practices.

Identifying resources available to physicians for management of financial toxicity: A Fellow-driven QI initiative

294

Background: Insufficient patient-physician cost communication stems in part from limited physician awareness of actionable interventions when cost issues arise. Oncologists report low awareness of resources to help patients with financial toxicity and often feel underprepared to discuss and navigate this issue. Methods: All oncology fellows (n = 19) at the University of California, Los Angeles were invited to participate in QI project during the fall of 2019. As part of the curriculum, fellows were individually paired with an experienced attending and asked to review a hypothetical case of financial toxicity. The case described an elderly widow on Medicare, living hours from the cancer center who was non-adherent to her oral cancer therapy due to high copays. Participants were asked to identify at least four financial toxicity risk factors in the case, and to identify resources and strategies that a physician could use help navigate her financial concerns. A cost-health literacy survey was administered at baseline and at the conclusion of the curriculum to evaluate the impact of the program. Results: Of 19 participants, 16 completed the case based scenario. Nine categories of risk factors were identified (63% of participants identified an insurance issue, 44% lack of social support, 44% drug cost, 50% fixed income, 50% distance from treatment center, 31% logistical transportation concern). Physician directed solutions were primarily focused on three categories: drug cost, insurance issue, and transportation concerns. Together, an institutional specific financial toxicity tip sheet was generated for further dispersal at the cancer center. After participation in the intervention, more fellows agreed/strongly agreed that they could help a patient experiencing financial toxicity (62% v 6%, p = 0.005). Conclusions: A focused intervention can increase awareness of resources and strategies available to physicians in the management of patient financial concerns, which may impact physician engagement with issues of financial toxicity. Standardized education programs to further educate physicians on financial toxicity management strategies is warranted.

Measure Scan and Synthesis of Palliative and End-of-Life Process Quality Measures for Advanced Cancer

PURPOSE

Monitoring and improving the quality of palliative and end-of-life cancer care remain pressing needs in the United States. Among existing measures that assess the quality of palliative and end-of-life care, many operationalize similar concepts. We identified existing palliative care process measures and synthesized these measures to aid stakeholder prioritization that will facilitate health system implementation in patients with advanced cancer.

METHODS

We reviewed MEDLINE/PubMed-indexed articles for process quality measures related to palliative and end-of-life care for patients with advanced cancer, supplemented by expert input. Measures were inductively grouped into "measure concepts" and higher-level groups.

RESULTS

Literature review identified 226 unique measures from 23 measure sources, which we grouped into 64 measure concepts within 12 groups. Groups were advance care planning (11 measure concepts), pain (7), dyspnea (9), palliative care-specific issues (6), other specific symptoms (17), comprehensive assessment (2), symptom assessment (1), hospice/palliative care referral (1), spiritual care (2), mental health (5), information provision (2), and culturally appropriate care (1).

CONCLUSION

Measure concepts covered the spectrum of care from acute symptom management to advance care planning and psychosocial needs, with variability in the number of measure concepts per group. This taxonomy of process quality measure concepts can be used by health systems seeking stakeholder input to prioritize targets for improving palliative and end-of-life care quality in patients with advanced cancer.

Pilot of the Life-Sustaining Treatment Decisions Initiative Among Veterans With Serious Illness

Background:

Prior to national spread, the Department of Veterans Affairs implemented a pilot of the life-sustaining treatment decisions initiative (LSTDI) to promote proactive goals of care conversations (GoCC) with seriously ill patients, including policy and practice standards, an electronic documentation template and order set, and implementation support.

Aim:

To describe a 2-year pilot of the LSTDI at 4 demonstration sites.

Design:

Prospective observational study.

Setting/Participants:

A total of 6664 patients who had at least one GoCC.

Results:

Descriptive statistics characterized patient demographics, goals of care, LST decisions, and risk of hospitalization or mortality among patients with at least one GoCC. Participants were on average 71.4 years old, 93.2% male, 87.1% white, and 64.7% urban; 27.3% died by the end of the pilot period. Fifteen percent lacked decision-making capacity (DMC). Nonmutually exclusive goals included to be cured (7.6%), to prolong life (34%), to improve/maintain quality of life (61.5%), to be comfortable (53%), to obtain support for family/caregiver (8.4%), to achieve life goals (2.1%), and other (10.5%). Many GoCCs resulted in a do not resuscitate (DNR) order (58.8%). Patients without DMC were more likely to have comfort-oriented goals (77.3% vs 48.8%) and a DNR (84% vs 52.6%). Chart abstraction supported content validity of GoCC documentation.

Conclusion:

The pilot demonstrated that standardizing practices for eliciting and documenting GoCCs resulted in customized documentation of goals of care and LST decisions of a large number of seriously ill patients and established the feasibility of spreading standardized practices throughout a large integrated health care system.

Integrated Model for Patient-Centered Advanced Liver Disease Care

Advanced liver disease (AdvLD) is a high-risk common condition with a progressive, highly morbid, and often fatal course. Despite effective treatments, there are substantial shortfalls in access to and use of evidence-based supportive and palliative care for AdvLD. Although patient-centered, chronic illness models that integrate early supportive and palliative care with curative treatments hold promise, there are several knowledge gaps that hinder development of an integrated model for AdvLD. We review these evidence gaps. We also describe a conceptual framework for a patient-centered approach that explicates key elements needed to improve integrated care. An integrated model of AdvLD would allow clinicians, patients, and caregivers to work collaboratively to identify treatments and other healthcare that best align with patients' priorities.

Perceptions of Facilitators and Barriers to Measuring and Improving Quality in Palliative Care Programs

OBJECTIVE

To examine perceptions of facilitators and barriers to quality measurement and improvement in palliative care programs and differences by professional and leadership roles.

METHODS

We surveyed team members in diverse US and Canadian palliative care programs using a validated survey addressing teamwork and communication and constructs for educational support and training, leadership, infrastructure, and prioritization for quality measurement and improvement. We defined key facilitators as constructs rated ≥4 (agree) and key barriers as those ≤3 (disagree) on 1 to 5 scales. We conducted multivariable linear regressions for associations between key facilitators and barriers and (1) professional and (2) leadership roles, controlling for key program and respondent factors and clustering by program.

RESULTS

We surveyed 103 respondents in 11 programs; 45.6% were physicians and 50% had leadership roles. Key facilitators across sites included teamwork, communication, the implementation climate (or environment), and program focus on quality improvement. Key barriers included educational support and incentives, particularly for quality measurement, and quality improvement infrastructure such as strategies, systems, and skilled staff. In multivariable analyses, perceptions did not differ by leadership role, but physicians and nurse practitioners/nurses/physician assistants rated most constructs statistically significantly more negatively than other team members, especially for quality improvement (6 of the 7 key constructs).

CONCLUSIONS

Although participants rated quality improvement focus and environment highly, key barriers included lack of infrastructure, especially for quality measurement. Building on these facilitators and measuring and addressing these barriers might help programs enhance palliative care quality initiatives' acceptability, particularly for physicians and nurses.

Establishing a Denominator for Palliative Care Quality Metrics for Patients with Advanced Cancer

Background: Measurement and monitoring of palliative care quality metrics for patients with advanced cancer promote early integration of palliative care within the oncology clinic. Accurately identifying the subset of advanced cancer patients within a population of cancer patients who would most benefit from palliative care is critical to the development of palliative care-relevant quality improvement activities. Methods: We evaluated two automated approaches to identifying patients with solid tumors sufficiently advanced to warrant discussions of palliative care and advanced care planning. These approaches included (1) pattern matching of words indicating an advanced cancer in oncology notes, radiology imaging, and active problem lists and (2) International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) codes. We randomly selected 586 charts of patients with active cancer who are patients in our health system to establish a gold standard for advanced cancer through expert chart review. We evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of these automated approaches to identify advanced cancer patients compared with the gold standard. Results: We found that the highest performing pattern matching method had a specificity of 76% and a sensitivity of 81%. Using our final ICD-10 algorithm, we achieved a specificity of 92% and a sensitivity of 68%. We improved our sensitivity to 76% while maintaining our specificity at 91% when we excluded patients assigned to oncologists who predominantly see hematological malignancies. Conclusions: We achieved high specificity and reasonable sensitivity for an advanced cancer quality metric denominator using an ICD-10 algorithm within an academic oncology practice. This concrete definition will help inform quality improvement efforts locally and beyond.

Serious illness communication among patients with head and neck cancer

2

Background: Head and neck cancer is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, yet little is known about the frequency and content of discussions addressing patients’ values, goals of care, and treatment preferences. Methods: Using an institutional cancer registry, we conducted a retrospective analysis of 70 decedents who underwent surgical treatment for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. We abstracted patients’ medical records using a standardized template. An independent reviewer re-abstracted 20% of the records. For abstracted data pertaining to documented values, goals of care, and/or treatment preferences our inter-rater reliability was greater than 93%. Results: The mean age at diagnosis was 66 years and 69% were male. An enduring advance directive, a completed Physician Order for Life Sustaining Treatment form, and a serious illness conversation documented in the medical record were noted in 27%, 4%, and 49% of the medical records, respectively. Half of the documented goals of care discussions were held in the inpatient setting, over 50% were held in the last month of life, and 25% were held in the last week of life. These conversations involved specialist palliative care providers (47%), hematologist/oncologists (41%), hospitalists (32%), head and neck surgeons (21%), radiation oncologists (19%), and intensivists (18%). None of these discussions involved patients’ primary care providers. Of those with a known location of death, 58% died in the hospital and 4 out of 5 of these patients died during attempted cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Conclusions: In this retrospective analysis, serious illness communication was documented in the minority of patients who died of head and neck cancer. These discussions occurred late in the trajectory of illness. The continuity relationships of teams treating head and neck cancer patients (e.g., head and neck surgeon, radiation/oncologist and hematologist/oncologist) situate these clinicians in the best position to enact serious illness conversations. These data suggest that opportunities to have these discussions upstream are often missed.

Implementation and dissemination of a shared mental model of palliative oncology

58

Background: American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines support early integration of palliative care (PC) into standard oncology practice; however, little is known as to whether improved outcomes can be achieved by modifying health care delivery and training oncology providers. Methods: We report our five year experience of embedding a nurse practitioner (NP) in an oncology clinic (March 2014-March 2019) to develop a shared mental model (SMM) of early, concurrent advance care planning (ACP) and PC as well as the collaborative effort to further disseminate this SMM throughout the Division of Hematology-Oncology using communication training, quality measurement, audit and feedback, leadership support, and monthly collaborative meetings. We developed PC quality metrics (process measures and end of life utilization measures) using a validated advanced cancer denominator. We used these measures to evaluate the impact of the PC-NP program (2014-2019) and provide individualized metric packets to each oncologist in the context of an annual half-day interactive communication training sessions (1-hr didactic, 3-hr small group role-play) each spring and monthly implementation team meetings from 2017-2019. Results: Compared to patients with advanced cancer not seen by the PC-NP program, patients who are enrolled in the program have higher rates of goals of care note documentation (80% vs. 17%, p < 0.01), higher rates of Physician Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment (POLST) completion (19% vs. 5%, p < 0.01), higher referral rates to the psychosocial oncology program (51% vs. 25%, p < 0.01), and higher referral rates to hospice (60% vs. 33%, p < 0.01). Among decedents, there was less hospital use (12 vs. 18 days) and ICU use (1.5 vs. 2.6 days) in the last 6 months of life. Since spring 2017, 19/21 NP’s, 64/68 physicians, and 17/20 fellows have participated in communication training. Among all patients with advanced cancer, goals of care note documentation has improved from 3% in March 2014 to 21% in March 2019. Conclusions: Embedding a trained PC-NP in oncology clinics to deliver upstream PC to patients on active treatment can lead to opportunities for development and dissemination of a SMM that translates into better primary and specialist PC.

Radiation oncology program directors’ attitudes towards 27 discrete palliative care skills

62

Background: Dedicated conferences in palliative care have been proposed as an ACGME requirement for radiation oncology (RO) residency programs. We assessed RO program directors’ attitudes towards discrete palliative care skills. Methods: In April 2019, we surveyed 93 United States RO residency program directors. The survey assessed program directors’ views of 27 discrete palliative care skills in eight domains adapted from the American Society of Clinical Oncology/American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine guidance statement defining high-quality palliative care in oncology. Using a nine-point scale, respondents rated each skill on three constructs: 1) importance to high-quality cancer care, 2) scope within RO practice, and 3) importance in RO residency education. Skills were categorized as “Included” (median score ≥7 for all constructs), “Excluded” (median score ≤3 for all constructs), or “Uncertain” (all other skills) using a composite score of all constructs. Results: Twenty-nine program directors (response rate 31%) completed the survey. Of the 27 skills, respondents rated 100% of the skills as important to care (median score ≥7), 70% of the skills as within the scope of RO practice, and 81% of the skills as important to resident education. No skills were rated as unimportant to care, out of scope, or unimportant to resident education (median score ≤3). Seventy percent of skills were categorized as “Included.” The domains of Caregiver Support (100%), End of Life Care (66%), and Spiritual/Cultural Assessment and Management (33%) had the highest proportions of skills rated as “Uncertain.” Time limitations (28%) and lack of education (28%) were rated as the main barriers to further integration of palliative care into RO. Conclusions: RO program directors value palliative care skills within RO. The majority of the assessed skills were rated as important to care, within scope of practice, and important to resident education.

Defining Serious Illness Among Adult Surgical Patients

CONTEXT

Palliative care (PC) for seriously ill surgical patients, including aligning treatments with patients' goals and managing symptoms, is associated with improved patient-oriented outcomes and decreased health care utilization. However, efforts to integrate PC alongside restorative surgical care are limited by the lack of a consensus definition for serious illness in the perioperative context.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to develop a serious illness definition for surgical patients and identify a denominator for quality measurement efforts.

METHODS

We developed a preliminary definition including a set of criteria for 11 conditions and health states. Using the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method, a 12-member expert advisory panel rated the criteria for each condition and health state twice, once after an in-person moderated discussion, for validity (primary outcome) and feasibility of measurement.

RESULTS

All panelists completed both rounds of rating. All 11 conditions and health states defining serious illness for surgical patients were rated as valid. During the in-person discussion, panelists refined and narrowed criteria for two conditions (vulnerable elder, heart failure). The final definition included the following 11 conditions and health states: vulnerable elder, heart failure, advanced cancer, oxygen-dependent pulmonary disease, cirrhosis, end-stage renal disease, dementia, critical trauma, frailty, nursing home residency, and American Society of Anesthesiology Risk Score IV-V.

CONCLUSION

We identified a consensus definition for serious illness in surgery. Opportunities remain in measuring the prevalence, identifying health trajectories, and developing screening criteria to integrate PC with restorative surgical care.