Interactions Between Intensive Care and Palliative Care Are Influenced by Training, Professionals' Perceptions and Institutional Barriers

Stakeholder engagement as a strategy to enhance palliative care involvement in intensive care units: A theory of change approach

BACKGROUND

Adult patients admitted to intensive care units in the terminal phase experience high symptom burden, increased costs, and diminished quality of dying. There is limited literature on palliative care engagement in ICU, especially in lower-middle-income countries. This study explores a strategy to enhance palliative care engagement in ICU through a stakeholder participatory approach.

METHODS

Theory of Change approach was used to develop a hypothetical causal pathway for palliative care integration into ICUs in India. Four facilitated workshops and fifteen research team meetings were conducted virtually over three months. Thirteen stakeholders were purposively chosen, and three facilitators conducted the workshops. Data included workshop discussion transcripts, online chat box comments, and team meeting minutes. These were collected, analysed and represented as theory of change map.

RESULTS

The desired impact of palliative care integration was good death. Potential long-term outcomes identified were fewer deaths in ICUs, discharge against medical advice, and inappropriate admissions; increased referrals to palliative care; and improved patient and family satisfaction. Twelve preconditions were identified, and eleven key interventions were developed. Five overarching assumptions related to contextual factors influencing the outcomes of interventions.

CONCLUSION

Theory of change framework facilitated the identification of proposed mechanisms and interventions underpinning palliative care integration in ICUs.

Derivation and performance of an end-of-life practice score aimed at interpreting worldwide treatment-limiting decisions in the critically ill

Background

Limitations of life-sustaining interventions in intensive care units (ICUs) exhibit substantial changes over time, and large, contemporary variation across world regions. We sought to determine whether a weighted end-of-life practice score can explain a large, contemporary, worldwide variation in limitation decisions.

Methods

The 2015–2016 (Ethicus-2) vs. 1999–2000 (Ethicus-1) comparison study was a two-period, prospective observational study assessing the frequency of limitation decisions in 4952 patients from 22 European ICUs. The worldwide Ethicus-2 study was a single-period prospective observational study assessing the frequency of limitation decisions in 12,200 patients from 199 ICUs situated in 8 world regions. Binary end-of-life practice variable data (1 = presence; 0 = absence) were collected post hoc (comparison study, 22/22 ICUs, n = 4592; worldwide study, 186/199 ICUs, n = 11,574) for family meetings, daily deliberation for appropriate level of care, end-of-life discussions during weekly meetings, written triggers for limitations, written ICU end-of-life guidelines and protocols, palliative care and ethics consultations, ICU-staff taking communication or bioethics courses, and national end-of-life guidelines and legislation. Regarding the comparison study, generalized estimating equations (GEE) analysis was used to determine associations between the 12 end-of-life practice variables and treatment limitations. The weighted end-of-life practice score was then calculated using GEE-derived coefficients of the end-of-life practice variables. Subsequently, the weighted end-of-life practice score was validated in GEE analysis using the worldwide study dataset.

Results

In comparison study GEE analyses, end-of-life discussions during weekly meetings [odds ratio (OR) 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.30–0.99], end-of-life guidelines [OR 0.52, (0.31–0.87)] and protocols [OR 15.08, (3.88–58.59)], palliative care consultations [OR 2.63, (1.23–5.60)] and end-of-life legislation [OR 3.24, 1.60–6.55)] were significantly associated with limitation decisions (all P < 0.05). In worldwide GEE analyses, the weighted end-of-life practice score was significantly associated with limitation decisions [OR 1.12 (1.03–1.22); P = 0.008].

Conclusions

Comparison study-derived, weighted end-of-life practice score partly explained the worldwide study’s variation in treatment limitations. The most important components of the weighted end-of-life practice score were ICU end-of-life protocols, palliative care consultations, and country end-of-life legislation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-022-03971-9.

Palliative Care Principles and Anesthesiology Clinical Practice: Current Perspectives

Background

Palliative care is a person-centered approach aiming to relieve patient’s health-related suffering and it is often needed when caring for critically ill patients to manage symptoms and identify goals of care.

Aim

To describe the integration of palliative care principles in anesthesiology clinical practice, within and outside the ICU and to analyze the additional challenges that COVID-19 pandemic is posing in this context.

Methods

For the purpose of this review, PubMed database was searched for studies concerning palliative care and end of life care, in contexts involving anesthesiologists and intensivists, published in the last 5 years.

Results

Anesthesiologists and intensivists integrate palliative care within their daily practice providing symptoms management as well as family counseling. High-quality communicational skills are fundamental for anesthesiologists and intensivists especially when interfacing with surrogate decision makers in the ICU or with patients in the preoperative setting while discussing goals of care. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has challenged many aspects of palliative care delivery: reduced family presence within the ICU, communication with families through phone calls or video calls, patient–physician relationship mediated by bulky personal protective equipment and healthcare workers physical and psychological distress due to the increased workload and limitations in resources are some of the most evident.

Conclusion

Anesthesiologists and intensivists are increasingly facing challenging clinical situations where principles and practice of palliative care have to be applied. In this sense, increasing knowledge on palliative care and providing specific training would allow to deliver high-quality symptom management, family counseling and end of life guidance in critical care settings. COVID-19 pandemic sets additional difficulties to palliative care delivery.