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

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.

Role matters in understanding 'quality' in palliative care: a qualitative analysis of patient, caregiver and practitioner perspectives

OBJECTIVES

To compare the discussions from two panels on the concept of palliative care quality for patients with advanced cancer, exploring the priorities reflected in each group's perspectives.

DESIGN

We convened two RAND-UCLA appropriateness panel discussions on palliative care quality in advanced cancer. Discussions were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Panel transcripts were analysed thematically using a matrix approach to examine perceptions and experiences of quality.

SETTING

Discussions were framed within the context of advanced cancer care and palliative care.

PARTICIPANTS

The patient-caregiver panel had 9 patients with current or a history of cancer and caregivers, and the practitioner panel had 10 expert practitioners representing fields of oncology, primary care, social work, palliative care, nursing, pain management and ethics.

RESULTS

Our analysis identified three thematic categories for understanding quality common across both groups and nine subthemes within those categories. At the highest level, quality was conceived as: (1) the patient and caregiver experience of care, (2) technical competence and (3) the structure of health system. Among the subthemes, four were present in only one of the two group's discussions: 'purpose and action' was specific to the patient-caregiver panel, whereas 'adhering to best medical practice', 'mitigating unintended consequences and side effects', and 'health system resources and costs' were specific to the practitioner panel.

CONCLUSIONS

While both panels aligned on the three key domains of quality, the particular dimensions through which they perceived quality varied in relation to their experience and role as a professional provider of care versus recipient of healthcare services. These differences suggest the importance of adopting a collaborative approach to quality measurement and improvement so that the values of all interested parties are represented in improvement efforts.

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.

Survey of Pediatric Palliative Care Quality Improvement Training, Activities, and Barriers

CONTEXT

Children with serious illness deserve high-quality pediatric palliative care (PPC). With expansion of PPC provision, it is important to understand the quality improvement (QI) activities of PPC clinicians and programs.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the 1) background, education/training, and activities in QI and 2) perceived barriers to QI efforts among PPC clinicians and programs nationally.

METHODS

An electronic survey was sent to members of the Pediatric Palliative Improvement Network, the National Coalition for Hospice and Palliative Care Pediatric Task Force, and the PPC Research Network as part of a study to develop hospital-based, primary PPC quality measures. Surveys queried participants' background, education/training, individual/team QI efforts, and barriers to QI work. Results were summarized descriptively.

RESULTS

Of the 95 respondents; most were female (84 [88%]) and/or white (84 [88%]). The majority (57 [54%]) were physicians, although participants represented a variety of clinical disciplines, researchers (10 [9%]), and administrators (6 [6%]). One-quarter (25 [26%]) reported having <10 hours total of training in QI, yet two-third (63 [66%]) participated in QI work. About one-third (35 [37%]) reported that their program had no dedicated staff for QI activities, yet over half (56 [59%]) of participants reported that their team participated in QI work. Participants reported that lack of personnel/time, standardized measures/tools, education/training/mentoring in QI, systems to promote QI work, and financing/grants were barriers.

CONCLUSION

Over half of PPC participants in this study reported involvement in QI activities despite limited staffing/time, QI training, and standardized measures, which presents challenges to this work.

Strategies to Mitigate Chemotherapy and Radiation Toxicities That Affect Eating

Background: Cancer and its therapy is commonly associated with a variety of side effects that impact eating behaviors that reduce nutritional intake. This review will outline potential causes of chemotherapy and radiation damage as well as approaches for the amelioration of the side effects of cancer during therapy. Methods: Information for clinicians, patients, and their caregivers about toxicity mitigation including nausea reduction, damage to epithelial structures such as skin and mucosa, organ toxicity, and education is reviewed. Results: How to anticipate, reduce, and prevent some toxicities encountered during chemotherapy and radiation is detailed with the goal to improve eating behaviors. Strategies for health care professionals, caregivers, and patients to consider include (a) the reduction in nausea and vomiting, (b) decreasing damage to the mucosa, (c) avoiding a catabolic state and muscle wasting (sarcopenia), and (d) developing therapeutic alliances with patients, caregivers, and oncologists. Conclusions: Although the reduction of side effects involves anticipatory guidance and proactive team effort (e.g., forward observation, electronic interactions, patient reported outcomes), toxicity reduction can be satisfying for not only the patient, but everyone involved in cancer care.