Using intuition or a formal palliative care needs assessment screening process in general practice to predict death within 12 months: A randomised controlled trial

Screening instruments for early identification of unmet palliative care needs: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The early detection of individuals who require palliative care is essential for the timely initiation of palliative care services. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to (1) Identify the screening instruments used by health professionals to promote early identification of patients who may benefit from palliative care; and (2) Assess the psychometric properties and clinical performance of the instruments.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, CNKI and Wanfang from inception to May 2023. We used the COnsensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement INstruments to assess the methodological quality of the development process for the instruments. The clinical performance of the instruments was assessed by narrative summary or meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses were conducted where necessary. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias assessment tool.

RESULTS

We included 31 studies that involved seven instruments. Thirteen studies reported the development and validation process of these instruments and 18 studies related to assessment of clinical performance of these instruments. The content validity of the instruments was doubtful or inadequate because of very low to moderate quality evidence. The pooled sensitivity (Se) ranged from 60.0% to 73.8%, with high heterogeneity (I2 of 88.15% to 99.36%). The pooled specificity (Sp) ranges from 70.4% to 90.2%, with high heterogeneity (I2 of 96.81% to 99.94%). The Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT) had better performance in hospitals than in general practice settings (Se=79.8% vs 45.3%, p=0.004; Sp=59.1% vs 97.0%, p=0.000).

CONCLUSION

The clinical performance of existing instruments in identifying patients with palliative care needs early ranged from poor to reasonable. The SPICT is used most commonly, has better clinical performance than other instruments but performs better in hospital settings than in general practice settings.

Unmet palliative care service needs: a patient-centred metric

OBJECTIVES

Financial pressures and competing demands for limited resources highlight the importance of defining the unmet need for specialty inpatient palliative care (PC), demonstrating the value of the service line and making decisions about staffing. One measure of access to specialty PC is penetration, the percentage of hospitalised adults receiving PC consultations. Although useful, additional means of quantifying programme performance are required for evaluating access by patients who would benefit. The study sought to define a simplified method of calculating unmet need for inpatient PC.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study analysed electronic health records from six hospitals in one health system in Los Angeles County.Unmet need for PC was defined by the number of hospitalised patients with four or more chronic serious comorbidities without a PC consultation divided by a denominator of all patients with one or more chronic serious conditions (CSCs) without a PC during the hospitalisation.

RESULTS

This calculation identified a subset of patients with four or more CSCs that accounts for 10.3% of the population of adults with one or more CSCs who did not receive PC services during a hospitalisation (unmet need). Monthly internal reporting of this metric led to significant PC programme expansion with an increase in average penetration for the six hospitals from 5.9% in 2017 to 11.2% in 2021.

CONCLUSIONS

Health system leadership can benefit from quantifying the need for specialty PC among seriously ill inpatients. This anticipated measure of unmet need is a quality indicator that complements existing metrics.

Uptake of advance care planning and its circumstances: An nationwide survey in Australian general practice

There are potential benefits associated with advance care planning (ACP), and general practitioners (GPs) are well placed to coordinate ACP initiatives with their patients. Few studies have reported on the uptake of different forms of advance care plan conducted by GPs and how this affects patients' place of death. The primary aims of the study were to examine uptake of verbal (conversations regarding care preferences) and written (documented care preferences) advance care plans and their associated factors from the perspective of Australian GPs. The secondary aim was to determine the impact of different types of advance care plans on place of death. Sixty-one GPs from three Australian states used a validated clinic-based data collection process to report on care provided for decedents in the last year of life, including provision of services, place of death, and uptake of ACP. We found that 58 (27.9%), 91 (43.7%) and 59 (28.4%) reported decedents had no advance care plans, verbal plans or written plans, respectively. There were increased uptake of both verbal plans (relative risk ratio [RRR] = 13.10, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.18-77.34) and written plans (RRR = 10.61, 95% CI: 1.72-65.57) if GPs foresaw the death for >90 days versus <7 days. Palliative care training history for GPs predicted uptake of verbal plans (RRR = 5.83, 95% CI: 1.46-31.93). Patients with verbal plans versus no plans were more likely to die at a private residence (odds ratio = 4.97, 95% CI: 1.32-18.63). Our findings suggest that expectation of death for at least three months prior to the event (where clinically possible) and palliative care training for GPs improve the uptake of ACP in general practice. Larger pragmatic trials are required to determine the impact of ACP on patients' place of death.

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.

Comparison of intuitive assessment and palliative care screening tool in the early identification of patients needing palliative care

The intuitive assessment of palliative care (PC) needs and Palliative Care Screening Tool (PCST) are the assessment tools used in the early detection of patients requiring PC. However, the comparison of their prognostic accuracies has not been extensively studied. This cohort study aimed to compare the validity of intuitive assessment and PCST in terms of recognizing patients nearing end-of-life (EOL) and those appropriate for PC. All adult patients admitted to Taipei City Hospital from 2016 through 2019 were included in this prospective study. We used both the intuitive assessment of PC and PCST to predict patients’ 6-month mortality and identified those appropriate for PC. The c-statistic value was calculated to indicate the predictive accuracies of the intuition and PCST. Of 111,483 patients, 4.5% needed PC by the healthcare workers’ intuitive assessment, and 6.7% had a PCST score ≥ 4. After controlling for other covariates, a positive response ‘yes’ to intuitive assessment of PC needs [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 9.89; 95% confidence interval (CI) 914–10.71] and a PCST score ≥ 4 (AOR = 6.59; 95%CI 6.17–7.00) were the independent predictors of 6-month mortality. Kappa statistics showed moderate concordance between intuitive assessment and PCST in predicting patients' 6-month mortality (k = 0.49). The c-statistic values of the PCST at recognizing patients’ 6-month mortality was significantly higher than intuition (0.723 vs. 0.679; p < 0.001). As early identification of patients in need of PC could improve the quality of EOL care, our results suggest that it is imperative to screen patients’ palliative needs by using a highly accurate screening tool of PCST.

Frontline provider perceptions of implementing home-based palliative care covered by an insurer

OBJECTIVE

To examine frontline providers' experiences implementing home-based palliative care (HBPC) covered by a private health insurer in partnership with community-based hospice, home health, and Accountable Care Organizations.

STUDY SETTING

Primary data collection at three community-based hospice and home health organizations in Northern and Southern California at the outset of the new private payer-contracted HBPC.

STUDY DESIGN

Qualitative focus groups with frontline HBPC providers.

DATA COLLECTION

Focus groups were guided by a nine-item, semi-structured research protocol, audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed by two independent coders using a grounded theory approach.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Participants (n = 24) were mostly White (79.2%) female (91.7%) aged 39 years or less (62.5%), and from diverse disciplines. Three major themes were identified: (1) patient referrals, (2) organizational factors, and (3) HBPC reimbursement. Findings highlight barriers and facilitators to implementing HBPC covered by an insurer including the organization's community reputation, the dynamic/"teaminess" of the HBPC team, having a site champion/"quarterback," and issues from a siloed medical system. Participants also discussed challenges with patient referrals, specifically, lack of palliative care knowledge (both providers and patients/families) and poor communication with patients referred to HBPC.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that despite a favorable perception of payer-contracted HBPC by frontline providers, barriers and facilitators persist, with patient accrual/referral paramount.

ID-PALL: An Instrument to Help You Identify Patients in Need of Palliative Care

Palliative care is frequently associated with the end of life and cancer. However, other patients may need palliative care, and this need may be present earlier in the disease trajectory. It is therefore essential to identify at the right time patients who need palliative care and to distinguish between those in need of general palliative care and those for whom a referral to specialists is required. ID-PALL has been developed as an instrument to support professionals in this identification and to discuss a suitable palliative care project, in order to maintain the best quality of life for patients and their relatives. Recommendations for clinical practice are also proposed to guide professionals after the identification phase.

Measurement Properties of ID-PALL, A New Instrument for the Identification of Patients With General and Specialized Palliative Care Needs

CONTEXT

To improve access to palliative care, identification of patients in need of general or specialized palliative care is necessary. To our knowledge, no available identification instrument makes this distinction. ID-PALL is a screening instrument developed to differentiate between these patient groups.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the structural and criterion validity and the inter-rater agreement of ID-PALL.

METHODS

In this multicenter, prospective, cross-sectional study, nurses and physicians assessed medical patients hospitalized for 2 to 5 days in two tertiary hospitals in Switzerland using ID-PALL. For the criterion validity, these assessments were compared to a clinical gold standard evaluation performed by palliative care specialists. Structural validity, internal consistency and inter-rater agreement were assessed.

RESULTS

2232 patients were assessed between January and December 2018, 97% by nurses and 50% by physicians. The variances for ID-PALL G and S are explained by two factors, the first one explaining most of the variance in both cases. For ID-PALL G, sensitivity ranged between 0.80 and 0.87 and specificity between 0.56 and 0.59. ID-PALL S sensitivity ranged between 0.82 and 0.94, and specificity between 0.35 and 0.64. A cut-off value of 1 delivered the optimal values for patient identification. Cronbach's alpha was 0.78 for ID-PALL G and 0.67 for ID-PALL S. The agreement rate between nurses and physicians was 71.5% for ID-PALL G and 64.6% for ID-PALL S.

CONCLUSION

ID-PALL is a promising screening instrument allowing the early identification of patients in need of general or specialized palliative care. It can be used by nurses and physicians without a specialized palliative care training. Further testing of the finalized clinical version appears warranted.

Last Year of Life Study-Cologne (LYOL-C) (Part II): study protocol of a prospective interventional mixed-methods study in acute hospitals to analyse the implementation of a trigger question and patient question prompt sheets to optimise patient-centred care

INTRODUCTION

The Last Year of Life Study-Cologne Part I (LYOL-C I) has identified general hospital units as the most important checkpoints for transitions in the last year of life of patients. Yet, satisfaction with hospitals, as reported by bereaved relatives, is the lowest of all health service providers. Thus, the LYOL-C Part II (LYOL-C II) focuses on optimising patient-centred care in acute hospitals for patients identified to be in their last year of life. LYOL-C II aims to test an intervention for hospitals by using a two-sided (healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients) trigger question-based intervention to 'shake' the system in a minimally invasive manner.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Prospective interventional mixed-methods study following a two-phase approach: phase I, individual interviews with HCPs and patient representatives to design the intervention to maximise ease of implementation and phase II, exploratory study with two arms and a prepost design with patients in their last year of life. The intervention will consist of the Surprise Question and the German version of the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT-DE) for HCPs to identify patients and provide patient-centred care, plus question prompt sheets for patients, encouraging them to initiate discussions with their HCPs. Data on transitions, changes in therapy, quality of care, palliative care integration and death of patients will be analysed. Furthermore, a staff survey (pre/post) and guided interviews with staff, patients and relatives (post) will be conducted. Finally, a formative socioeconomic impact assessment to provide evidence regarding the sustainability of the intervention will be performed.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Cologne (#20-1431). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

DRKS00022378.

A systematic review of the integration of palliative care in dementia management

OBJECTIVE

Dementia is a progressive illness with a complex biopsychosocial constellation of symptoms faced by millions of individuals and families worldwide. Palliative care teams have specialized in symptom management and end-of-life care for decades; however, the role of palliative care in dementia management is not yet well elucidated. The aim of this systematic review was to understand the impact of palliative care in dementia management.

METHOD

This systematic review was conducted using a prospective study protocol. Medline and PubMed were searched from January 1, 1998 to October 2017. Eligible studies included single-blind cluster, two-arm parallel cluster, or unblinded randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational studies, retrospective cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, concurrent mixed methods study, qualitative study, and Delphi studies.

RESULTS

Four key themes were identified in this review: goals of care and end-of-life conversations, symptom management, emergency room visits, and prescribing behavior. In each domain, palliative care consultation either showed benefit or was postulated to have benefit if implemented.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

Although the literature to support or refute thematic conclusions is not large, there was a trend toward patient care benefit across several domains. Large RCTs with longer follow-up across different settings should be undertaken to solidify the themes and trends outlined in this review. Understanding the views of healthcare providers including referral sources (i.e., general practitioners and specialists) through qualitative research could optimize palliative care referrals, implement palliative care recommendations, and improve a targeted palliative care education curriculum.

Where do GPs find patients with possible palliative care needs? A cross-sectional descriptive study

BACKGROUND

For GPs to implement early palliative care, the first step is to identify patients with palliative care needs. The surprise question (SQ) is a screening tool that aims to aid this identification; for example, a response of 'no' to the SQ - 'Would you be surprised if this patient would die within a year?' - would suggest palliative care may be needed.

AIM

To describe setting-specific screening results of patients eligible for early palliative care in family practices, which is defined as patients aged ≥45 years with GPs' responses of 'no' to the SQ.

DESIGN & SETTING

A secondary analysis was undertaken using a cross-sectional descriptive study in family practices in five areas in Belgium.

METHOD

GPs were recruited by targeted sampling. As a first part of an implementation research project, participating GPs provided demographic information about themselves and also provided a response to the SQ for all patients who came to the practice in 10 consecutive office days. A summary table describing the sex, age, location of contact (GP surgeries, patients' homes, or nursing homes) of the patients was provided by each GP.

RESULTS

Fifty-six GPs provided complete data for the practice summary tables. In total, 9150 patients were described (all ages, all settings), of which 506 patients (6%) had a GP response of 'no' to the SQ. The distribution of SQ-no-as-answer patients per setting was: 152/7659 (2%) patients seen in family practice surgeries; 139/998 (14%) patients seen in their homes; and 215/493 (44%) patients seen in nursing homes.

CONCLUSION

There was a large number of patients with SQ-no-as-answer, with possible palliative care needs. To enhance implementation of early palliative care, future research should compare results of SQ and other screening tools with palliative care symptoms assessments.

Nursing diagnoses clusters: survival and comfort in oncology end-of-life care

BACKGROUND

Holistic care and nursing diagnoses are essential in end-of-life, since interventions based on these ensure greater patient comfort and quality of life.

AIMS

To identify clusters of nursing diagnoses and repercussions for patient comfort and survival.

METHODS

A prospective cohort of 66 end-of-life patients with cancer was examined. Diagnostic groupings were created based on the Kolcaba's theory of comfort. Pearson's chi-square test and Kaplan-Meier estimator were used to assess the relationship between clusters, comfort, and survival.

FINDINGS

Three diagnostic groups and 23 nurse diagnoses were used. The first and most prevalent diagnosis cluster was related to intestinal tract disorders and sleep. The second was related to neuropsychological characteristics and fatigue associated with lower survival, while the third cluster was related to functionality and perception, which was shown to be associated with less comfort.

CONCLUSION

The three clusters were significantly associated with comfort and survival.

Identifying patients who could benefit from palliative care by making use of the general practice information system: the Surprise Question versus the SPICT

OBJECTIVE

We compared the performance of two tools to help general practitioners (GPs) identify patients in need of palliative care: the Surprise Question (SQ) and the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT).

METHODS

Prospective cohort study in two general practices in the Netherlands with a size of 3640 patients. At the start of the study the GPs selected patients by heart using the SQ. The SPICT was translated into a digital search in electronic patient records. The GPs then selected patients from the list thus created. Afterwards the GPs were interviewed about their experiences. The following year a record was kept of all the patients deceased in both practices. We analysed the characteristics of the patients selected and the deceased. We calculated the performance characteristics concerning predicting 1-year mortality.

RESULTS

The sensitivity of the SQ was 50%, of the SPICT 57%; the specificity 99% and 98%. When analysing the deceased (n = 36), 10 died relatively suddenly and arguably could not be identified. Leaving out these 10, the sensitivity of the SQ became 69%, of the SPICT 81%. The GPs found the performance of the digital search quite time consuming.

CONCLUSION

The SPICT seems to be better in identifying patients in need of palliative care than the SQ. It is also more time consuming than the SQ. However, as the digital search can be performed more easily after it has been done for the first time, initial investments can repay themselves.

General practitioners' perceptions on the feasibility and acceptability of implementing a risk prediction checklist to support their end-of-life discussions in routine care: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

General practitioners' (GPs) play a central role in facilitating end-of-life discussions with older patients nearing the end-of-life. However, prognostic uncertainty of time to death is one important barrier to initiation of these discussions.

OBJECTIVE

To explore GPs' perceptions of the feasibility and acceptability of a risk prediction checklist to identify older patients in their last 12 months of life and describe perceived barriers and facilitators for implementing end-of-life planning.

METHODS

Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 GPs practising in metropolitan locations in New South Wales and Queensland between May and June 2019. Data were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Eight themes emerged: accessibility and implementation of the checklist, uncertainty around checklist's accuracy and usefulness, time of the checklist, checklist as a potential prompt for end-of-life conversations, end-of-life conversations not an easy topic, end-of-life conversation requires time and effort, uncertainty in identifying end-of-life patients and limited community literacy on end-of-life. Most participants welcomed a risk prediction checklist in routine practice if assured of its accuracy in identifying which patients were nearing end-of-life.

CONCLUSIONS

Most participating GPs saw the value in risk assessment and end-of-life planning. Many emphasized the need for appropriate support, tools and funding for prognostic screening and end-of-life planning for this to become routine in general practice. Well validated risk prediction tools are needed to increase clinician confidence in identifying risk of death to support end-of-life care planning.

Identification of patients with potential palliative care needs: A systematic review of screening tools in primary care

BACKGROUND

Despite increasing evidence of the benefits of early access to palliative care, many patients do not receive palliative care in a timely manner. A systematic approach in primary care can facilitate earlier identification of patients with potential palliative care needs and prompt further assessment.

AIM

To identify existing screening tools for identification of patients with advanced progressive diseases who are likely to have palliative care needs in primary healthcare and evaluate their accuracy.

DESIGN

Systematic review (PROSPERO registration number CRD42019111568).

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL were searched from inception to March 2019.

RESULTS

From 4,127 unique articles screened, 25 reported the use or development of 10 screening tools. Most tools use prediction of death and/or deterioration as a proxy for the identification of people with potential palliative care needs. The tools are based on a wide range of general and disease-specific indicators. The accuracy of five tools was assessed in eight studies; these tools differed significantly in their ability to identify patients with potential palliative care needs with sensitivity ranging from 3% to 94% and specificity ranging from 26% to 99%.

CONCLUSION

The ability of current screening tools to identify patients with advanced progressive diseases who are likely to have palliative care needs in primary care is limited. Further research is needed to identify standardised screening processes that are based not only on predicting mortality and deterioration but also on anticipating the palliative care needs and predicting the rate and course of functional decline. This would prompt a comprehensive assessment to identify and meet their needs on time.

[Covid-19 pandemic. Mechanical ventilation in geriatric patients - an ethical dilemma?]

Dieser Beitrag möchte einen Überblick darüber geben, wie und mit Hilfe welcher Kriterien eine medizinisch, ethisch und rechtlich vertretbare Entscheidung darüber getroffen werden kann, welche der betagten Patienten mit einer schweren COVID-19-Pneumonie mittels künstlicher Beatmung behandelt werden sollten und welche von einer solchen Therapie eher nicht profitieren würden.

An Interventional Study for the Early Identification of Patients With Palliative Care Needs and the Promotion of Advance Care Planning and Advance Directives

CONTEXT

Programs identifying patients needing palliative care and promoting advance care planning (ACP) are rare in Asia.

OBJECTIVES

This interventional cohort study aimed to identify hospitalized patients with palliative care needs using a validated palliative care screening tool (PCST), examine the ability of the PCST to predict mortality, and explore effects of a pragmatic ACP program targeted by PCST on the utilization of life-sustaining treatment during the last three months of life.

METHODS

In this prospective study, we used PCST to evaluate patients' palliative care needs between 2015 and 2016 and followed patients for three months. ACP with advance directives (ADs) was systematically offered to all patients with PCST score ≥4.

RESULTS

Of 47,153 hospitalized patients, 10.4% had PCST score ≥4. During follow-up, 2121 individuals died within three months of palliative care screening: 1225 (25.0%) with PCST score ≥4 and 896 (2.1%) with PCST score <4. After controlling for covariates, PCST score ≥4 was significantly associated with a higher mortality within three months of screening (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 6.86; 95% CI 6.16-7.63). Moreover, ACP consultation (AOR 0.78; 95% CI 0.66-0.92) and AD completion (AOR 0.49; 95% CI 0.36-0.65) were associated with a lower likelihood of receiving life-sustaining treatments during the last three months of life.

CONCLUSION

We demonstrated the feasibility of implementing a comprehensive palliative care program to identify patients with palliative care needs and promote ACP and AD in Eastern Asia. ACP consultation and AD completion were associated with reduced utilization of life-sustaining treatments during the last three months of life.

Screening with the double surprise question to predict deterioration and death: an explorative study

Background

Early identification of palliative patients is challenging. The Surprise Question (SQ1; Would I be surprised if this patient were to die within 12 months?) is widely used to identify palliative patients. However, its predictive value is low. Therefore, we added a second question (SQ2) to SQ1: ‘Would I be surprised if this patient is still alive after 12 months?’ We studied the accuracy of this double surprise question (DSQ) in a general practice.

Methods

We performed a prospective cohort study with retrospective medical record review in a general practice in the eastern part of the Netherlands. Two general practitioners (GPs) answered both questions for all 292 patients aged ≥75 years (mean age 84 years).

Primary outcome was 1-year death, secondary outcomes were aspects of palliative care.

Results

SQ1 was answered with ‘no‘ for 161/292 patients. Of these, SQ2 was answered with ‘yes’ in 22 patients. Within 12 months 26 patients died, of whom 24 had been identified with SQ1 (sensitivity: 92%, specificity: 49%). Ten of them were also identified with SQ2 (sensitivity: 42%, specificity: 91%). The latter group had more contacts with their GP and more palliative care aspects were discussed.

Conclusions

The DSQ appears a feasible and easy applicable screening tool in general practice. It is highly effective in predicting patients in high need for palliative care and using it helps to discriminate between patients with different life expectancies and palliative care needs. Further research is necessary to confirm the findings of this study.

Early integration of palliative care: translation, cross-cultural adaptation and content validity of the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool in a Swedish healthcare context

BACKGROUND

Timely identification of patients with palliative care needs is a prerequisite for being able to carry out effective and equal palliative care. The Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT) identifies patients likely to benefit from a palliative approach.

AIM

The main objective was to describe the translation, cross-cultural adaptation and content validation process of the SPICT-SE. In this process, the prefinal SPICT-SE was tested in focus group interviews to explore how the tool was perceived and interpreted by healthcare professionals in a Swedish healthcare context.

METHODS

In this qualitative descriptive study, the translation, cross-cultural adaptation and content validation process of the SPICT-SE was based on a recommended method for cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. The process included two independent forward translations, a synthesis, and one independent back-translation. An expert committee consolidated all the versions and developed the prefinal version of the SPICT-SE. The prefinal version of the SPICT-SE was tested in four focus group interviews with physicians and nurses engaged in inpatient or outpatient care in south-west Sweden. A thematic analysis of the transcribed interviews was performed. The SPICT-SE was then revised to the final version.

RESULTS

In the thematic analysis, four themes were constructed that together described how the SPICT-SE was perceived and interpreted by healthcare professionals: The mindset is familiar and relevant; the tool needs to be adjusted in order to be clearer; the purpose and consequences of the tool are ambiguous; and the tool supports a palliative approach.

CONCLUSION

The SPICT-SE has now been successfully translated, culturally adapted and content validated in a Swedish healthcare context.

Identifying palliative care needs in residential care

The aim of this study is to determine the accuracy, feasibility and acceptability of the surprise question (SQ) in combination with a clinical prediction tool (Supportive and Palliative Care Indicator Tool (SPICT)) in identifying residents who have palliative care needs in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) in Australia. A prospective cohort study in two RACFs containing both high-level care (including dementia) and low-level care beds. Directors of Nursing screened 187 residents at risk of dying by 12 months using first the SQ, and if positive, then the SPICT. At 12-months follow-up, deaths, hospitalisations, use of palliative care services, end-of-life care and clinical indicators were recorded. The SQ had a sensitivity of 70%, a specificity of 69.6%, a positive predictive value of 40.6% and a negative predictive value of 88.7% for death. All residents identified by the SQ had at least two general indicators of deterioration, while 98.8% had at least one disease-specific indicator on the SPICT. The SPICT marginally increased the ability to identify residents in need of proactive end-of-life planning. A combination of the SQ and the SPICT is effective in predicting palliative care needs in residents of aged care facilities, and may trigger timely care planning.

Would You Be Surprised if This Patient Died in the Next 12 Months? Using the Surprise Question to Increase Palliative Care Consults From the Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

There is a growing movement to increase palliative care consults from the emergency department (ED) to reduce healthcare costs and improve quality of life. The surprise question is a screening tool that emergency medicine physicians may be able to use towards achieving this goal.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this study were to increase awareness of hospice and palliative care medicine (HPM) among emergency medicine (EM) providers and to evaluate whether this heightened awareness increased palliative care consults among participating emergency medicine providers.

METHODS

We conducted an anonymous convenience sample survey and two educational interventions about HPM including the surprise question among emergency medicine resident and attending physicians at a large urban public academic quaternary care center from July to November 2018. A report of palliative care consults ordered between August 1, 2017 and January 1, 2019 was generated from the electronic health records used by the hospital. The number of palliative care consults made before and after the educational intervention was compared.

RESULTS

After the first educational intervention centered on the surprise question, palliative care consults from the ED increased from an average of 2.25 per month (range 0 to 8, SD: 2.38) to 12.67 per month (range 9 to 19, SD: 4.01, p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Educating EM physicians about the surprise question can increase the number of palliative care consults from the ED, thereby potentially improving patient care and decreasing costs by avoiding unwanted healthcare interventions.

Comparing the predictive ability of the Revised Minimum Dataset Mortality Risk Index (MMRI-R) with nurses' predictions of mortality among frail older people: a cohort study

OBJECTIVES

to establish the accuracy of community nurses' predictions of mortality among older people with multiple long-term conditions, to compare these with a mortality rating index and to assess the incremental value of nurses' predictions to the prognostic tool.

DESIGN

a prospective cohort study using questionnaires to gather clinical information about patients case managed by community nurses. Nurses estimated likelihood of mortality for each patient on a 5-point rating scale. The dataset was randomly split into derivation and validation cohorts. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate risk equations for the Revised Minimum Dataset Mortality Risk Index (MMRI-R) and nurses' predictions of mortality individually and combined. Measures of discrimination and calibration were calculated and compared within the validation cohort.

SETTING

two NHS Trusts in England providing case-management services by nurses for frail older people with multiple long-term conditions.

PARTICIPANTS

867 patients on the caseload of 35 case-management nurses. 433 and 434 patients were assigned to the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively. Patients were followed up for 12 months.

RESULTS

249 patients died (28.72%). In the validation cohort, MMRI-R demonstrated good discrimination (Harrell's c-index 0.71) and nurses' predictions similar discrimination (Harrell's c-index 0.70). There was no evidence of superiority in performance of either method individually (P = 0.83) but the MMRI-R and nurses' predictions together were superior to nurses' predictions alone (P = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

patient mortality is associated with higher MMRI-R scores and nurses' predictions of 12-month mortality. The MMRI-R enhanced nurses' predictions and may improve nurses' confidence in initiating anticipatory care interventions.

An online international comparison of thresholds for triggering a negative response to the "Surprise Question": a study protocol

BACKGROUND

The Surprise Question (SQ) "would I be surprised if this patient were to die in the next 12 months?" has been suggested to help clinicians, and especially General Practitioners (GPs), identify people who might benefit from palliative care. The prognostic accuracy of this approach is unclear and little is known about how GPs use this tool in practice. Are GPs consistent, individually and as a group? Are there international differences in the use of the tool? Does including the alternative Surprise Question ("Would I be surprised if the patient were still alive after 12 months?") alter the response? What is the impact on the treatment plan in response to the SQ? This study aims to address these questions.

METHODS

An online study will be completed by 600 (100 per country) registered GPs. They will be asked to review 20 hypothetical patient vignettes. For each vignette they will be asked to provide a response to the following four questions: (1) the SQ [Yes/No]; (2) the alternative SQ [Yes/No]; (3) the percentage probability of dying [0% no chance - 100% certain death]; and (4) the proposed treatment plan [multiple choice]. A "surprise threshold" for each participant will be calculated by comparing the responses to the SQ with the probability estimates of death. We will use linear regression to explore any differences in thresholds between countries and other clinician-related factors, such as years of experience. We will describe the actions taken by the clinicians and explore the differences between groups. We will also investigate the relationship between the alternative SQ and the other responses. Participants will receive a certificate of completion and the option to receive feedback on their performance.

DISCUSSION

This study explores the extent to which the SQ is consistently used at an individual, group, and national level. The findings of this study will help to understand the clinical value of using the SQ in routine practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03697213 (05/10/2018). Prospectively registered.

Computer screening for palliative care needs in primary care: a mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

Though the majority of people could benefit from palliative care before they die, most do not receive this approach, especially those with multimorbidity and frailty. GPs find it difficult to identify such patients.

AIM

To refine and evaluate the utility of a computer application (AnticiPal) to help primary care teams screen their registered patients for people who could benefit from palliative care.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A mixed-methods study of eight GP practices in Scotland, conducted in 2016-2017.

METHOD

After a search development cycle the authors adopted a mixed-methods approach, combining analysis of the number of people identified by the search with qualitative observations of the computer search as used by primary care teams, and interviews with professionals and patients.

RESULTS

The search identified 0.8% of 62 708 registered patients. A total of 27 multidisciplinary meetings were observed, and eight GPs and 10 patients were interviewed. GPs thought the search identified many unrecognised patients with advanced multimorbidity and frailty, but were concerned about workload implications of assessment and care planning. Patients and carers endorsed the value of proactive identification of people with advanced illness.

CONCLUSION

GP practices can use computer searching to generate lists of patients for review and care planning. The challenges of starting a conversation about the future remain. However, most patients regard key components of palliative care (proactive planning, including sharing information with urgent care services) as important. Screening for people with deteriorating health at risk from unplanned care is a current focus for quality improvement and should not be limited by labelling it solely as 'palliative care'.