Are specialist-provided end-of-life scenarios key to initiation of advance care planning in primary care? A mixed-methods study.

OBJECTIVES: Specialist-provided end-of-life scenarios (SP-EOLS) may improve advance care planning (ACP) implementation in primary care by helping overcome barriers such as uncertain prognosis and poor interprofessional collaboration. We aimed to explore the current use and potential impact of SP-EOLS on ACP in Dutch primary care. METHODS: We performed a mixed-methods study. From patients discussed in a hospital-based academic palliative care multidisciplinary team meeting between 2016 and 2019 and died, we collected primary care electronic medical records data on SP-EOLS, actual EOLS, and ACP initiation and applied descriptive and comparative analyses. Subsequently, we interviewed general practitioners (GPs) and thematically analyzed the transcripts. RESULTS: In 69.7% of 66 reviewed patient files, SP-EOLS were found. In patients whose GP had received SP-EOLS, ACP conversations were more often reported (92.0 vs. 61.0%, p = 0.006). From 11 GP interviews, we identified 4 themes: (1) SP-EOLS guide GPs, patients, and relatives when dealing with an uncertain future perspective; (2) SP-EOLS provide continuity of care between primary and secondary/tertiary care; (3) SP-EOLS should be tailored to the individual patient; and (4) SP-EOLS need to be personalized and uniformly transferred to GPs. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: SP-EOLS may facilitate ACP conversations by GPs. They have the potential to help overcome existing barriers to ACP implementation by providing guidance and supporting interprofessional collaboration. Future research should focus on improving SP-EOLS and tailor them to the needs of all end users, focusing on improving their effect on ACP conversations.

An online international comparison of palliative care identification in primary care using the Surprise Question.

BACKGROUND: The Surprise Question ('Would I be surprised if this patient died within 12 months?') identifies patients in the last year of life. It is unclear if 'surprised' means the same for each clinician, and whether their responses are internally consistent. AIM: To determine the consistency with which the Surprise Question is used. DESIGN: A cross-sectional online study of participants located in Belgium, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Switzerland and UK. Participants completed 20 hypothetical patient summaries ('vignettes'). Primary outcome measure: continuous estimate of probability of death within 12 months (0% [certain survival]-100% [certain death]). A threshold (probability estimate above which Surprise Question responses were consistently 'no') and an inconsistency range (range of probability estimates where respondents vacillated between responses) were calculated. Univariable and multivariable linear regression explored differences in consistency. Trial registration: NCT03697213. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Registered General Practitioners (GPs). Of the 307 GPs who started the study, 250 completed 15 or more vignettes. RESULTS: Participants had a consistency threshold of 49.8% (SD 22.7) and inconsistency range of 17% (SD 22.4). Italy had a significantly higher threshold than other countries (p = 0.002). There was also a difference in threshold levels depending on age of clinician, for every yearly increase, participants had a higher threshold. There was no difference in inconsistency between countries (p = 0.53). CONCLUSIONS: There is variation between clinicians regarding the use of the Surprise Question. Over half of GPs were not internally consistent in their responses to the Surprise Question. Future research with standardised terms and real patients is warranted.

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

Following publication of the original article [1], an error in reference 18 was reported.

[Oncology at a glance]. / Oncologie in vogelvlucht.

The prevalence of cancer is rising, on the one hand because of increasing cancer incidence as a consequence of lifestyle changes, aging and screening and on the other hand because of increasing survival rates thanks to increasingly successful therapeutic possibilities. Since virtually all caregivers are confronted with cancer patients or survivors, a basic knowledge of oncology is required. In this article we present a brief update on the current situation in the field of oncology. We pay attention to diagnostics, treatment and palliative care for patients with cancer.

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.

Early Identification of Patients in Need of Palliative Care in Slovenian General Practice.

BACKGROUND: To help general practitioners (GPs) in early identification of patients with palliative care (PC) needs, this pilot study aimed to determine the potential of the combined original surprise question (SQ1) ('Would I be surprised if this patient died within the next 12 months?') and the second surprise question (SQ2) ('Would I be surprised if this patient was still alive after 12 months?'). We hypothesized that answering these SQs would trigger them to make a multidimensional care plan. METHODS: 26 Slovenian GPs, randomized into 4 groups, were invited to write a care plan for each of the four patients described in case vignettes (2 oncologic, 1 organ failure and 1 frailty case). GPs in group 1 were only asked to write a care plan for each patient. GPs in group 2 answered SQ1 and GPs in groups 3 and 4 answered SQ1 and SQ2 before writing the care plan. The type and number of PC aspects mentioned in the respective care plans were quantified into a numeric RADboud ANTicipatory (RADIANT) score. RESULTS: Mean RADIANT scores in groups 1-4 were 2.2, 3.6, 2.5 and 3.1, respectively. When comparing the different vignettes, vignette B (terminal oncologic patient) scored best (3.6). Mean RADIANT scores in groups 3 and 4 were slightly higher for GPs who would be surprised compared to GPs who would not be surprised if the patient was still alive in 12 months. CONCLUSION: The combined SQs were considered helpful in the early identification of patients in need of PC in Slovenian general practice.

[Measuring pain is useful and every doctor can do it: 7 tips]. / Pijn meten is nuttig en iedere arts kan het: 7 tips.

Pain is one of the main factors influencing quality of life; its incidence is higher than is generally assumed. Pain is not spontaneously reported in all cases; it should be asked about more often. Not measuring pain is one of the main reasons for inadequate pain treatment. Pain should be assessed and recorded more routinely in both primary and secondary healthcare. This can be done in simple and quick ways. Self-reporting using a visual-analogue scale or numeric rating scale is the preferred method. This can be done even by patients with a mild cognitive disorder. Several simple and reliable observational scales exist for patients who cannot report well, e.g. elderly patients with a cognitive disorder or young children. For chronic pain, the low-threshold use of a multi-dimensional scale will increase the likelihood of successful treatment.

Palliative medicine update: a multidisciplinary approach.

Palliative medicine is a young specialty that is officially recognized in relatively few countries. The World Health Organization published an adapted definition in 2002, describing palliative care as an approach that improves the quality of life of patients and their families facing the problems associated with life-threatening illness. When the accent is shifting from curative to palliative, the goal of management is the maintenance or improvement of the patient's quality of life. The different dimensions of palliative care and the multitude of types of care to be provided require a multidisciplinary, well-functioning team, effective communication and a clear task division between primary and hospital care. Considering the complexity of care for incurable patients, a multidisciplinary approach is a prerequisite to balance curative and palliative intervention options. Optimal functioning of a team requires excellent training, communication and a description of the tasks and responsibilities of each team member. More and more advanced care planning is introduced in palliative care, focusing on an early identification of patients in a palliative trajectory and on the prevention of annoying symptoms, hoping that this approach results in an improved quality of life for the individual patient, less useless technical investigations and a better end-of-life care on the place the patient and his family desires.

Assessment and treatment of malnutrition in Dutch geriatric practice: consensus through a modified Delphi study.

OBJECTIVE: scientific evidence regarding the optimal management of malnutrition in geriatric patients is scarce. Our aim was to develop a consensus statement for geriatric hospital practice concerning six elements: (i) definition of malnutrition, (ii) screening and assessment, (iii) treatment and monitoring, (iv) roles and responsibilities of involved health care professionals, (v) communication and coordination of care between hospital and community health care professionals, (vi) quality indicators for malnutrition management. DESIGN: a modified Delphi study. METHODS: eleven geriatricians with special interest in malnutrition participated. In four rounds the experts rated the relevance of 204 statements, which were based on a literature review, on a five-point Likert scale. From the responses, means and 95% CIs were calculated. Consensus was defined as a lower 95% confidence limit ≥4.0. RESULTS: the panel reached consensus that malnutrition should be considered a geriatric syndrome. The nutritional status should be assessed using the Mini Nutritional Assessment combined with comprehensive geriatric assessment. Nutritional interventions should be combined with interventions targeting underlying factors. Specific goals for nutritional therapy and ways to achieve them were agreed upon. According to the experts, malnutrition is best managed by a multidisciplinary team for whom roles and responsibilities were specified. At discharge written information about the nutritional problem, treatment plan and goals should be provided to the patient, caregiver and community health care professionals. CONCLUSION: this study shows that a qualitative study based on a modified Delphi technique can result in national consensus on essential ingredients for a practical malnutrition guideline for geriatric patients.

[Indications for palliative sedation]. / Indicatiestelling voor palliatieve sedatie.

Two male patients, aged 75 and 47 years, suffered from dyspnoea in the terminal phase of their disease, COPD and lung cancer, respectively. Both were given palliative sedation. The palliative consultation team was consulted when problems occurred. Although the Royal Dutch Medical Association issued a guideline on palliative sedation, the practice of administering palliative sedation is still complicated. Determining whether a symptom is 'refractory' and estimating the life expectancy is especially complex. A symptom is refractory when it causes unbearable suffering and conventional modes of treatment are not effective or timely. Knowledge of this guideline, early anticipation of possible scenarios and communication with the patient and his family contribute to good care. The palliative consultation team can help physicians with these decisions, preferably by starting at an early stage.