Randomized Controlled Trial of a Decision Support Intervention About Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for Hospitalized Patients Who Have a High Risk of Death.

BACKGROUND: Many seriously ill hospitalized patients have cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) as part of their care plan, but CPR is unlikely to achieve the goals of many seriously ill hospitalized patients. OBJECTIVE: To determine if a multicomponent decision support intervention changes documented orders for CPR in the medical record, compared to usual care. DESIGN: Open-label randomized controlled trial. PATIENTS: Patients on internal medicine and neurology wards at two tertiary care teaching hospitals who had a 1-year mortality greater than 10% as predicted with a validated model and whose care plan included CPR, if needed. INTERVENTION: Both the control and intervention groups received usual communication about CPR at the discretion of their care team. The intervention group participated in a values clarification exercise and watched a CPR video decision aid. MAIN MEASURE: The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had a no-CPR order at 14 days after enrollment. KEY RESULTS: We recruited 200 patients between October 2017 and October 2018. Mean age was 77 years. There was no difference between the groups in no-CPR orders 14 days after enrollment (17/100 (17%) intervention vs 17/99 (17%) control, risk difference, - 0.2%) (95% confidence interval - 11 to 10%; p = 0.98). In addition, there were no differences between groups in decisional conflict summary score or satisfaction with decision-making. Patients in the intervention group had less conflict about understanding treatment options (decisional conflict knowledge subscale score mean (SD), 17.5 (26.5) intervention arm vs 40.4 (38.1) control; scale range 0-100 with lower scores reflecting less conflict). CONCLUSIONS: Among seriously ill hospitalized patients who had CPR as part of their care plan, this decision support intervention did not increase the likelihood of no-CPR orders compared to usual care. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Canadian Frailty Network, The Ottawa Hospital Academic Medical Organization.

Implementing Advance Care Planning Tools in Practice: A Modified World Café to Elicit Barriers and Recommendations from Potential Adopters.

This paper reports findings from a modified World Café conducted at a palliative care professional conference in 2019, where input on tools to support advance care planning (ACP) was solicited from healthcare practitioners, managers and family members of patients. Barriers to ACP tool use included insufficient structures and resources in healthcare, death-avoidance culture and inadequate patient and family member engagement. Recommendations for tool use included clarification of roles and processes, training, mandates and monitoring, leadership support, greater reflection of diversity in tools and methods for public engagement. This paper illuminates factors to consider when implementing ACP tools in healthcare.

A pilot evaluation of the Strengthening a Palliative Approach in Long-Term Care (SPA-LTC) program.

BACKGROUND: Despite increased annual mortality in long-term care (LTC) homes, research has shown that care of dying residents and their families is currently suboptimal in these settings. The purpose of this study was to evaluate resident and family outcomes associated with the Strengthening a Palliative Approach in LTC (SPA-LTC) program, developed to help encourage meaningful end of life discussions and planning. METHODS: The study employs a mixed method design in four LTC homes across Southern Ontario. Data were collected from residents and families of the LTC homes through chart reviews, interviews, and focus groups. Interviews with family who attended a Palliative Care Conference included both closed-ended and open-ended questions. RESULTS: In total, 39 residents/families agreed to participate in the study. Positive intervention outcomes included a reduction in the proportion of emergency department use at end of life and hospital deaths for those participating in SPA-LTC, improved support for families, and increased family involvement in the care of residents. For families who attended a Palliative Care Conference, both quantitative and qualitative findings revealed that families benefited from attending them. Residents stated that they appreciated learning about a palliative approach to care and being informed about their current status. CONCLUSIONS: The benefits of SPA-LTC for residents and families justify its continued use within LTC. Study results also suggest that certain enhancements of the program could further promote future integration of best practices within a palliative approach to care within the LTC context. However, the generalizability of these results across LTC homes in different regions and countries is limited given the small sample size.

Breaking silence: a survey of barriers to goals of care discussions from the perspective of oncology practitioners.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is the leading cause of death in the developed world, and yet healthcare practitioners infrequently discuss goals of care (GoC) with hospitalized cancer patients. We sought to identify barriers to GoC discussions from the perspectives of staff oncologists, oncology residents, and oncology nurses. METHODS: This was a single center survey of staff oncologists, oncology residents, and inpatient oncology nurses. Barriers to GoC discussions were assessed on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = extremely unimportant; 7 = extremely important). RESULTS: Between July 2013 and May 2014, of 185 eligible oncology clinicians, 30 staff oncologists, 10 oncology residents, and 28 oncology nurses returned surveys (response rate of 37%). The most important barriers to GoC discussions were patient and family factors. They included family members' difficulty accepting poor prognoses (mean score 5.9, 95% CI [5.7, 6.2]), lack of family agreement in the goals of care (mean score 5.8, 95% CI [5.5, 6.1]), difficulty understanding the limitations of life-sustaining treatments (mean score 5.8, 95% CI [5.6, 6.1]), lack of patients' capacity to make goals of care decisions (mean score 5.7, 95% CI [5.5, 6.0]), and language barriers (mean score 5.7, 95% CI [5.4, 5.9]). Participants viewed system factors and healthcare provider factors as less important barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Oncology practitioners perceive patient and family factors as the most limiting barriers to GoC discussions. Our findings underscore the need for oncology clinicians to be equipped with strong communication skills to help patients and families navigate GoC discussions.

Medical students' experiences with goals of care discussions and their impact on professional identity formation.

CONTEXT: Goals of care (GoC) discussions occur amongst patients, family members and clinicians in order to establish plans of care and are invaluable aspects of end-of-life care. In previous research, medical learners have reported insufficient training and emotional distress about end-of-life decision making, but most studies have focused on postgraduate trainees and have been quantitative or have evaluated specific educational interventions. None have qualitatively explored medical students' experiences with GoC discussions, their perceptions of associated hidden curricula, and the impacts of these on professional identity formation (PIF), the individualised developmental processes by which laypersons evolve to think, act and feel like, and ultimately become, medical professionals. METHODS: Using purposive sampling at one Canadian medical school, individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 medical students to explore their experiences with GoC discussions during their core internal medicine clerkship. Interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed and anonymised. Concurrently with data collection, transcripts were analysed iteratively and inductively using interpretative phenomenological analysis, a qualitative research approach that allows the rich exploration of subjective experiences. RESULTS: Participants reported minimal support and supervision in conducting GoC discussions, which were experienced as ethically challenging, emotionally powerful encounters exemplifying tensions between formal and hidden curricula. Role modelling and institutional culture were key mechanisms through which hidden curricula were transmitted, subverting formal curricula in doing so and contributing to participants' emotional distress. Participants' coping responses were generally negative and included symptoms of burnout, the pursuit of standardisation, rationalisation, compartmentalisation and the adaptation of previously held, more idealised professional identities. CONCLUSIONS: GoC discussions in this study were often led by inexperienced medical students and impacted negatively on their PIF. Through complex emotional processes, they struggled to reconcile earlier concepts of physician identities with newly developing ones and often reluctantly adopted suboptimal professional behaviours and attitudes. Improved education about GoC discussions is necessary for patient care and may represent concrete and specific opportunities to influence students' PIF positively.

Perceived Barriers to Goals of Care Discussions With Patients With Advanced Cancer and Their Families in the Ambulatory Setting: A Multicenter Survey of Oncologists.

BACKGROUND: Earlier goals of care (GOC) discussions in patients with advanced cancer are associated with less aggressive end-of-life care including decreased use of medical technologies. Unfortunately, conversations often occur late in the disease trajectory when patients are acutely unwell. Here, we evaluate practitioner perspectives of patient, family, physician, and external barriers to early GOC discussions in the ambulatory oncology setting. METHODS: A previously published survey to assess barriers to GOC discussions among clinicians on inpatient medical wards was modified for the ambulatory oncology setting and distributed to oncologists from 12 centers in Ontario, Canada. Physicians were asked to rank the importance of various barriers to having GOC discussions (1 = extremely unimportant to 7 = extremely important). RESULTS: Questionnaires were completed by 30 (24%) of 127 physicians. Respondents perceived patient- and family-related factors as the most important barriers to GOC discussions. Of these, patient difficulty accepting prognosis or desire for aggressive treatment were perceived as most important. Patients' inflated expectation of treatment benefit was also considered an important barrier to discontinuing active cancer-directed therapy. While physician barriers were ranked lower than patient-related factors, clinicians' self-identified difficulty estimating prognosis and uncertainty regarding treatment benefits were also considered important. Patient's refusal for referral was the most highly rated barrier to early palliative care referral. Most respondents were nonetheless very or extremely willing to initiate (90%) or lead (87%) GOC discussions. CONCLUSION: Oncologists ranked patient- and family-related factors as the most important barriers to GOC discussions, while clinicians' self-identified difficulty estimating prognosis and uncertainty regarding treatment benefits were also considered important. Further work is required to assess patient preferences and perceptions and develop targeted interventions.

Barriers to and enablers of advance care planning with patients in primary care: Survey of health care providers.

OBJECTIVE: To identify barriers to and enablers of advance care planning (ACP) perceived by physicians and other health professionals in primary care. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, self-administered survey. SETTING: Ontario, Alberta, and British Columbia. PARTICIPANTS: Family physicians (n = 117) and other health professionals (n = 64) in primary care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Perceived barriers relating to the clinician, characteristics of patients, and system factors, rated on a 7-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 6 (an extreme amount), and enablers reported using an open-ended question. RESULTS: Between November 2014 and June 2015, questionnaires were returned by 72.2% (117 of 162) of family physicians and 68.8% (64 of 93) of the other health professionals. Physicians rated insufficient time, inability to electronically transfer the advance care plan across care settings, decreased interaction with patients near the end of life owing to transfer of care, and patients' difficulty understanding limitations and complications of treatment options as the highest barriers. Other health professionals additionally identified their own lack of knowledge and difficulty accessing the physician as barriers. Themes identified as enablers included greater public engagement, clinician attitudes, creating capacity for clinicians, integrating ACP into practice, and system and policy supports. CONCLUSION: In primary care, there are barriers to engaging patients in ACP at the patient, provider, and system levels that could potentially be addressed through the informed development of multifaceted interventions.

Older patient engagement in advance care planning in Canadian primary care practices: Results of a multisite survey.

OBJECTIVE: To assess primary care patients' engagement in advance care planning (ACP) and predictors of engagement. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey using a revised version of a validated questionnaire. SETTING: Alberta, Ontario, and British Columbia. PARTICIPANTS: Convenience sample of 20 family practices that provided a consecutive sample of 810 patients aged 50 years and older. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Engagement in ACP activities, and sociodemographic and health-related predictors of having engaged in ACP activities. RESULTS: Patients had a mean age of 66 years (55.6% women). Two-thirds of patients (68.5%; 555) had thought about the kinds of medical treatments they would want or not want if they were sick and in hospital, 52.8% (n = 428) had talked with someone about what they would want, 32.0% (n = 259) had written down their wishes, 50.4% (n = 408) had named someone to be their substitute decision maker, and 23.0% (n = 186) had engaged in all 4 key ACP activities. Of those patients who had talked to someone about medical treatments wanted or not, 17.5% (n = 75) had talked to their family doctors. Age (adjusted odds ratio per 10-year category of 1.55; 95% CI 1.26 to 1.90; P < .001) was significantly associated with having engaged in all ACP activities. CONCLUSION: Many patients have engaged in some ACP activities, but few have discussed ACP with their family physicians. Strategies should be implemented in primary care to reduce the barriers to discussing ACP.

Canadian hospital nurses' roles in communication and decision-making about goals of care: An interpretive description of critical incidents.

BACKGROUND: Nurses in acute medical units are uniquely positioned to support goals of care communication. Further understanding of nurse and physician perceptions about hospital nurses' actual and possible roles was required to improve goals of care communication. OBJECTIVE: To critically examine nurse and physician perceptions of the nurse's role in communication with seriously ill patients and their families. DESIGN: We focus on the qualitative component of a mixed method study. We employed an interpretive descriptive approach informed by Flanagan's critical incident technique. SETTINGS: Participants were recruited from the acute medical units at three tertiary care hospitals in three Canadian provinces. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty participants provided interviews (10 from each site): 12 nurses, 9 staff physicians and 9 medical resident physicians. METHODS: Participants' described "critical incidents" they considered as "excellent" or "poor" or "usual" practice. Interviews, were audiotaped and transcribed. Team-based analysis used constant comparison and triangulation to identify healthcare team members' roles in goals of care communication. RESULTS: We identified two major themes from 120 critical incidents: 1) the ambiguous nature of the nurse's role in formal, physician-led, decision-making communication, and 2) embedded in care serious illness communication. Physicians understood nurses' supportive role in relation to their own communication practices that culminated in decisions about care; nurses' reported their roles were determined by unit routines, physician practices and preferences, and their self-confidence in supporting decision-making. Nurses described their unique role in facilitating informal and spontaneous communication with patients and families that was critical background work to physician-led goals of care communication. CONCLUSIONS: Nurses and physicians had different understandings, practices and beliefs about goals of care communication The value of nurses embedded in care work is key to supporting the interprofessional team's work during formal goals of care communication.

Premature Discontinuation of Pediatric Randomized Controlled Trials: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the proportion of pediatric randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that are prematurely discontinued, examine the reasons for discontinuation, and compare the risk for recruitment failure in pediatric and adult RCTs. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of RCTs approved by 1 of 6 Research Ethics Committees (RECs) in Switzerland, Germany, and Canada between 2000 and 2003. We recorded trial characteristics, trial discontinuation, and reasons for discontinuation from protocols, corresponding publications, REC files, and a survey of trialists. RESULTS: We included 894 RCTs, of which 86 enrolled children and 808 enrolled adults. Forty percent of the pediatric RCTs and 29% of the adult RCTs were discontinued. Slow recruitment accounted for 56% of pediatric RCT discontinuations and 43% of adult RCT discontinuations. Multivariable logistic regression analyses suggested that pediatric RCT was not an independent risk factor for recruitment failure after adjustment for other potential risk factors (aOR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.57-2.63). Independent risk factors were acute care setting (aOR, 4.00; 95% CI, 1.72-9.31), nonindustry sponsorship (aOR, 4.45; 95% CI, 2.59-7.65), and smaller planned sample size (aOR, 1.05; 95% CI 1.01-1.09, in decrements of 100 participants). CONCLUSION: Forty percent of pediatric RCTs were discontinued prematurely, owing predominately to slow recruitment. Enrollment of children was not an independent risk factor for recruitment failure.

Barriers to Goals of Care Discussions With Patients Who Have Advanced Heart Failure: Results of a Multicenter Survey of Hospital-Based Cardiology Clinicians.

BACKGROUND: Conversations about goals of care in hospital are important to patients who have advanced heart failure (HF). METHODS: We conducted a multicenter survey of cardiology nurses, fellows, and cardiologists at 8 Canadian teaching hospitals. The primary outcome was the importance of barriers to goals-of-care discussions in hospital (1 = extremely unimportant; 7 = extremely important). We also elicited perspectives on roles of different practitioners in having these conversations. RESULTS: Questionnaires were returned by 770/1024 (75.2%) eligible clinicians. The most important perceived barriers were: family members' and patients' difficulty in accepting a poor prognosis (mean [SD] score 5.9 [1.1] and 5.7 [1.2], respectively), family members' and patients' lack of understanding about the limitations and harms of life-sustaining treatments (5.8 [1.1] and 5.7 [1.2], respectively), and lack of agreement among family members about goals of care (5.8 [1.2]). Interprofessional team members were viewed as having different but important roles in goals-of-care discussions. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiology clinicians perceive family and patient-related factors as the most important barriers to goals-of-care discussions in hospital. Many members of the interprofessional team were viewed as having important roles in addressing goals of care. These findings can inform the design of future interventions to improve communication about goals of care in advanced HF.

Validation of quality indicators for end-of-life communication: results of a multicentre survey.

BACKGROUND: The lack of validated quality indicators is a major barrier to improving end-of-life communication and decision-making. We sought to show the feasibility of and provide initial validation for a set of quality indicators related to end-of-life communication and decision-making. METHODS: We administered a questionnaire to patients and their family members in 12 hospitals and asked them about advance care planning and goals-of-care discussions. Responses were used to calculate a quality indicator score. To validate this score, we determined its correlation with the concordance between the patients' expressed wishes and the medical order for life-sustaining treatments recorded in the hospital chart. We compared the correlation with concordance for the advance care planning component score with that for the goal-of-care discussion scores. RESULTS: We enrolled 297 patients and 209 family members. At all sites, both overall quality indicators and individual domain scores were low and there was wide variability around the point estimates. The highest-ranking institution had an overall quality indicator score (95% confidence interval) of 40% (36%-44%) and the lowest had a score of 18% (11%-25%). There was a strong correlation between the overall quality indicator score and the concordance measure (r = 0.72, p = 0.008); the estimated correlation between the advance care planning score and the concordance measure (r = 0.35) was weaker than that between the goal-of-care discussion scores and the concordance measure (r = 0.53). INTERPRETATION: Quality of end-of-life communication and decision-making appears low overall, with considerable variability across hospitals. The proposed quality indicator measure shows feasibility and partial validity. Study registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT01362855.

Barriers and facilitators for goals of care discussions between residents and hospitalised patients.

PURPOSE: To observe how residents are engaging in goals of care discussions with patients and identify thematic patterns that inhibited (barriers) and promoted discussion (facilitators) about goals of care. DESIGN: Admission encounters between residents and patients admitted to a tertiary care academic hospital were recorded and analysed using a qualitative descriptive method. Patients included in the study were individuals over the age of 65 being admitted to the internal medicine service. Residents were eligible if they were trainees in family medicine, emergency medicine, general surgery or internal medicine who were on call for the inpatient medicine rotation. RESULTS: A total of 15 resident-patient encounters were recorded and analysed, of which 12 encounters included a goals of care discussion. Barriers to goals of care discussions were due to missed opportunities to clarify patient's preferences for life-sustaining treatment and missed opportunities to engage the patient in further discussion. Facilitators to goals of care discussions were use of simple language and exploration of patient's previous experiences with life-sustaining treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Asking about patients' previous experiences with life support can be an effective strategy to gauge the patient's understanding and goals of care preferences. This knowledge can improve residents' skill in communicating with their patients about goals of care and inform future education initiatives.

Agreements between Industry and Academia on Publication Rights: A Retrospective Study of Protocols and Publications of Randomized Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about publication agreements between industry and academic investigators in trial protocols and the consistency of these agreements with corresponding statements in publications. We aimed to investigate (i) the existence and types of publication agreements in trial protocols, (ii) the completeness and consistency of the reporting of these agreements in subsequent publications, and (iii) the frequency of co-authorship by industry employees. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used a retrospective cohort of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) based on archived protocols approved by six research ethics committees between 13 January 2000 and 25 November 2003. Only RCTs with industry involvement were eligible. We investigated the documentation of publication agreements in RCT protocols and statements in corresponding journal publications. Of 647 eligible RCT protocols, 456 (70.5%) mentioned an agreement regarding publication of results. Of these 456, 393 (86.2%) documented an industry partner's right to disapprove or at least review proposed manuscripts; 39 (8.6%) agreements were without constraints of publication. The remaining 24 (5.3%) protocols referred to separate agreement documents not accessible to us. Of those 432 protocols with an accessible publication agreement, 268 (62.0%) trials were published. Most agreements documented in the protocol were not reported in the subsequent publication (197/268 [73.5%]). Of 71 agreements reported in publications, 52 (73.2%) were concordant with those documented in the protocol. In 14 of 37 (37.8%) publications in which statements suggested unrestricted publication rights, at least one co-author was an industry employee. In 25 protocol-publication pairs, author statements in publications suggested no constraints, but 18 corresponding protocols documented restricting agreements. CONCLUSIONS: Publication agreements constraining academic authors' independence are common. Journal articles seldom report on publication agreements, and, if they do, statements can be discrepant with the trial protocol.

Premature Discontinuation of Randomized Trials in Critical and Emergency Care: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: Randomized clinical trials that enroll patients in critical or emergency care (acute care) setting are challenging because of narrow time windows for recruitment and the inability of many patients to provide informed consent. To assess the extent that recruitment challenges lead to randomized clinical trial discontinuation, we compared the discontinuation of acute care and nonacute care randomized clinical trials. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort of 894 randomized clinical trials approved by six institutional review boards in Switzerland, Germany, and Canada between 2000 and 2003. SETTING: Randomized clinical trials involving patients in an acute or nonacute care setting. SUBJECTS AND INTERVENTIONS: We recorded trial characteristics, self-reported trial discontinuation, and self-reported reasons for discontinuation from protocols, corresponding publications, institutional review board files, and a survey of investigators. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 894 randomized clinical trials, 64 (7%) were acute care randomized clinical trials (29 critical care and 35 emergency care). Compared with the 830 nonacute care randomized clinical trials, acute care randomized clinical trials were more frequently discontinued (28 of 64, 44% vs 221 of 830, 27%; p = 0.004). Slow recruitment was the most frequent reason for discontinuation, both in acute care (13 of 64, 20%) and in nonacute care randomized clinical trials (7 of 64, 11%). Logistic regression analyses suggested the acute care setting as an independent risk factor for randomized clinical trial discontinuation specifically as a result of slow recruitment (odds ratio, 4.00; 95% CI, 1.72-9.31) after adjusting for other established risk factors, including nonindustry sponsorship and small sample size. CONCLUSIONS: Acute care randomized clinical trials are more vulnerable to premature discontinuation than nonacute care randomized clinical trials and have an approximately four-fold higher risk of discontinuation due to slow recruitment. These results highlight the need for strategies to reliably prevent and resolve slow patient recruitment in randomized clinical trials conducted in the critical and emergency care setting.

Communication tools for end-of-life decision-making in the intensive care unit: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: For many patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), preferences for end-of-life care are unknown, and clinicians and substitute decision-makers are required to make decisions about the goals of care on their behalf. We conducted a systematic review to determine the effect of structured communication tools for end-of-life decision-making, compared to usual care, upon the number of documented goals of care discussions, documented code status, and decisions to withdraw life-sustaining treatments, in adult patients admitted to the ICU. METHODS: We searched multiple databases including MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, ERIC, and Cochrane from database inception until July 2014. Two reviewers independently screened articles, assessed eligibility, verified data extraction, and assessed risk of bias using the tool described by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. Pooled estimates of effect (relative risk, standardized mean difference, or mean difference), were calculated where sufficient data existed. GRADE was used to evaluate the overall quality of evidence for each outcome. RESULTS: We screened 5785 abstracts and reviewed the full text of 424 articles, finding 168 eligible articles, including 19 studies in the ICU setting. The use of communication tools increased documentation of goals-of-care discussions (RR 3.47, 95% CI 1.55, 7.75, p = 0.020, very low-quality evidence), but did not have an effect on code status documentation (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.96, 1.10, p = 0.540, low-quality evidence) or decisions to withdraw or withhold life-sustaining treatments (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.89, 1.08, p = 0.70, low-quality evidence). The use of such tools was associated with a decrease in multiple measures of health care resource utilization, including duration of mechanical ventilation (MD -1.9 days, 95% CI -3.26, -0.54, p = 0.006, very low-quality evidence), length of ICU stay (MD -1.11 days, 95% CI -2.18, -0.03, p = 0.04, very low-quality evidence), and health care costs (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.5, -0.15, p < 0.001, very low-quality evidence). CONCLUSIONS: Structured communication tools may improve documentation of EOL decision making and may result in lower resource use. The supporting evidence is low to very low in quality. Further high-quality randomized studies of simple communication interventions are needed to determine whether structured, rather than ad hoc, approaches to end-of-life decision-making improve patient-level, family-level, and system-level outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42014012913.

The determinants of home and nursing home death: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Most Canadians die in hospital, and yet, many express a preference to die at home. Place of death is the result of the interaction among sociodemographic, illness- and healthcare-related factors. Although home death is sometimes considered a potential indicator of end-of-life/palliative care quality, some determinants of place of death are more modifiable than others. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the determinants of home and nursing home death in adult patients diagnosed with an advanced, life-limiting illness. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed for studies in English published from January 1, 2004 to September 24, 2013 that evaluated the determinants of home or nursing home death compared to hospital death in adult patients with an advanced, life-limiting condition. The adjusted odds ratios, relative risks, and 95% confidence intervals of each determinant were extracted from the studies. Meta-analyses were performed if appropriate. The quality of individual studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and the body of evidence was assessed according to the GRADE Working Group criteria. RESULTS: Of the 5,900 citations identified, 26 retrospective cohort studies were eligible. The risk of bias in the studies identified was considered low. Factors associated with an increased likelihood of home versus hospital death included multidisciplinary home palliative care, preference for home death, cancer as opposed to other diagnoses, early referral to palliative care, not living alone, having a caregiver, and the caregiver's coping skills. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge about the determinants of place of death can be used to inform care planning between healthcare providers, patients and family members regarding the feasibility of dying in the preferred location and may help explain the incongruence between preferred and actual place of death. Modifiable factors such as early referral to palliative care, presence of a multidisciplinary home palliative care team were identified, which may be amenable to interventions that improve the likelihood of a patient dying in the preferred location. Place of death may not be a very good indicator of the quality of end-of-life/palliative care since it is determined by multiple factors and is therefore dependent on individual circumstances.

Educational interventions to train healthcare professionals in end-of-life communication: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Practicing healthcare professionals and graduates exiting training programs are often ill-equipped to facilitate important discussions about end-of-life care with patients and their families. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness of educational interventions aimed at providing healthcare professionals with training in end-of-life communication skills, compared to usual curriculum. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, ERIC and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from the date of inception to July 2014 for randomized control trials (RCT) and prospective observational studies of educational training interventions to train healthcare professionals in end-of-life communication skills. To be eligible, interventions had to provide communication skills training related to end-of-life decision making; other interventions (e.g. breaking bad news, providing palliation) were excluded. Our primary outcomes were self-efficacy, knowledge and end-of-life communication scores with standardized patient encounters. Sufficiently similar studies were pooled in a meta-analysis. The quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE. RESULTS: Of 5727 candidate articles, 20 studies (6 RCTs, 14 Observational) were included in this review. Compared to usual teaching, educational interventions to train healthcare professionals in end-of-life communication skills were associated with greater self-efficacy (8 studies, standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.57;95% confidence interval [CI] 0.40-0.75; P < 0.001; very low quality evidence), more knowledge (4 studies, SMD 0.76;95% CI 0.40-1.12; p < 0.001; low quality evidence), and improvements in communication scores (8 studies, SMD 0.69; 95% CI 0.41-0.96; p < 0.001; very low quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether these educational interventions affect patient-level outcomes. CONCLUSION: Very low to low quality evidence suggests that end-of-life communication training may improve healthcare professionals' self-efficacy, knowledge, and EoL communication scores compared to usual teaching. Further studies comparing two active educational interventions are recommended with a continued focus on contextually relevant high-level outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42014012913.

Nonbeneficial treatment Canada: definitions, causes, and potential solutions from the perspective of healthcare practitioners*.

OBJECTIVE: Many healthcare workers are concerned about the provision of nonbeneficial treatment in the acute care setting. We sought to explore the perceptions of acute care practitioners to determine whether they perceived nonbeneficial treatment to be a problem, to generate an acceptable definition of nonbeneficial treatment, to learn about their perceptions of the impact and causes of nonbeneficial treatment, and the ways that they feel could reduce or resolve nonbeneficial treatment. DESIGN: National, bilingual, cross-sectional survey of a convenience sample of nursing and medical staff who provide direct patient care in acute medical wards or ICUs in Canada. MAIN RESULTS: We received 688 responses (response rate 61%) from 11 sites. Seventy-four percent of respondents were nurses. Eighty-two percent of respondents believe that our current means of resolving nonbeneficial treatment are inadequate. The most acceptable definitions of nonbeneficial treatment were "advanced curative/life-prolonging treatments that would almost certainly result in a quality of life that the patient has previously stated that he/she would not want" (88% agreement) and "advanced curative/life-prolonging treatments that are not consistent with the goals of care (as indicated by the patient)" (83% agreement). Respondents most commonly believed that nonbeneficial treatment was caused by substitute decision makers who do not understand the limitations of treatment, or who cannot accept a poor prognosis (90% agreement for each cause), and 52% believed that nonbeneficial treatment was "often" or "always" continued until the patient died or was discharged from hospital. Respondents believed that nonbeneficial treatment was a common problem with a negative impact on all stakeholders (> 80%) and perceived that improved advance care planning and communication training would be the most effective (92% and 88%, respectively) and morally acceptable (95% and 92%, respectively) means to resolve the problem of nonbeneficial treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Canadian nurses and physicians perceive that our current means of resolving nonbeneficial treatment are inadequate, and that we need to adopt new techniques of resolving nonbeneficial treatment. The most promising strategies to reduce nonbeneficial treatment are felt to be improved advance care planning and communication training for healthcare professionals.