Everyday Ethics or Deference to Expertise: Experiences of Pediatric Palliative Care Teams with Ethics Consultancy.

Background: Little is known about the extent to which pediatric palliative care (PPC) clinicians are engaged in ethics consults or how they perceive interactions with ethics consultants. Objective: Describe the extent to which PPC team members serve in pediatric health care ethics (PHCE) consultancy roles and to describe their experiences interacting with pediatric ethic consultant services. Design: Online survey distributed to members of the American Academy of Pediatrics and American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Care pediatric and ethics section and special interest groups in the United States. Results: Eighty-six responses were obtained (response rate 45%) from PPC teams in 70 different children's hospitals located in 34 states. Almost all (97%) reported a functional ethics consult service such that PPC is not expected to meet the ethics need of the institution. A person involved on the PPC team also performed ethics consults in half (49%) of the settings, predominantly the PPC physician. Most respondents who perceive PPC teams engage in ethics-relevant work as part of their everyday PPC work. Formal ethics training was lacking among PPC members involved in ethics consults with few ethics degrees (15%), certifications (6%), or fellowships (2%). Discord (67%), conflict (49%), limitations to treatment (48%), and distress (41%) were cited as the most frequent reasons for which PPC teams consult ethics. PPC respondents identified role clarity, coordinated engagement, timely presence, and open communication as strong PHCE consultant practices. Conclusions: PPC team members performing ethics consults may benefit from additional ethics education and training. Further research is warranted to delineate scope of ethics consultancy relevant to PPC and role clarity.

Exploring Ethical Dimensions in Neuropalliative Care.

Neurologic illnesses can be challenging to diagnose, involve changes in consciousness, and are often complicated by prognostic uncertainty. These disorders can affect how individuals interact with their environment, and as a result, many ethical concerns may arise related to their medical care. Key ethical issues in neuropalliative care include shared decision-making, evolving autonomy and capacity, best interest and harm principles, beneficence and nonmaleficence, futile and inappropriate care, justice and equity, and ableism. The four core principles of medical ethics, beneficence, nonmaleficence, justice, and autonomy, are foundational in considering approaches to these ethical challenges. Shared decision-making is rooted in the principle of autonomy. Evolving autonomy and capacity evoke autonomy, beneficence, and nonmaleficence. The best interest and harm principles are rooted in beneficence and nonmaleficence. Questions of futility and inappropriate care are founded in the principles of nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice. Ableism invokes questions of nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice. Practitioners of neurology will encounter ethical challenges in their practice. Framing decisions around the core ethical principles of beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice will help clinicians navigate challenging situations while acknowledging and respecting each patient's individual story.

The Impact of a Pediatric Continuity Care Intensivist Program on Patient and Parent Outcomes: An Unblinded Randomized Controlled Trial.

Objectives We studied the impact of a standardized continuity care intensivists (CCIs) program on patient and family outcomes for long-stay patients in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU), also assessing the intervention's acceptability and feasibility. Methods A patient-level, unblinded randomized-controlled trial in a PICU at a large children's hospital. Participants included: (1) patients with ≥ 7 days PICU admission and likely to stay another 7 days; (2) their parents; (3) PICU attendings participating as continuity attendings; and (4) PICU attendings providing usual care (UC). We examined a bundled intervention: (1) standardized continuity attending role, (2) communication training course for CCI, and (3) standardized timing of contact between CCI and patient/family. Results Primary outcome was patient PICU length of stay. Secondary outcomes included patient, parental, and clinician outcomes. We enrolled 115 parent-patient dyads (231 subjects), 58 patients were randomized into treatment arm and 56 into the UC arm. Thirteen attendings volunteered to serve as CCI, 10 as UC. No association was found between the intervention and patient PICU length of stay ( p = 0.5), other clinical factors, or parental outcomes. The intervention met a threshold for feasibility of enrollment, retention, and implementation while the majority of providers agreed the intervention was acceptable with more efficient decision making. Thirty percent CCIs felt the role took too much time, and 20% felt time was not worth the benefits. Conclusion CCI intervention did not impact patient or family outcomes. PICU attendings believed that the implementation of the CCI program was feasible and acceptable with potential benefits for efficiency of decision making.

Programmatic Palliative Care Consultations in Pediatric Heart Transplant Evaluations.

Guidelines advocate for integrating palliative care into the management of heart failure (HF) and of children with life-limiting disease. The potential impact of palliative care integration into pediatric HF on patient-centered outcomes is poorly understood. The present study sought to assess the association of programmatic implementation of palliative care into the heart transplant evaluation process with hospital-free days (HFD) and end of life (EOL) treatment choices. The study included patients less than 19 years of age who underwent a heart transplant evaluation between February 2012 and April 2020 at a single center. Patients evaluated in the programmatic palliative care (PPC) era (January 2016-April 2020) were compared to patients evaluated in the pre-PPC era (February 2012-December 2015). The study included 188 patients, with 91 (48%) in the PPC era and 97 (52%) in the pre-PCC era. Children < 1 year of age at the time of the evaluation represented 32% of the cohort. 52% of patients had single ventricle physiology. PPC was not significantly associated with increased HFD (IRR 0.94 [95% CI 0.79-1.2]). PPC was however associated with intensity of EOL care with decreased mechanical ventilation (OR 0.12 [95% CI 0.02-0.789], p = 0.03) and decreased use of ionotropic support (OR 0.13 [95% CI 0.02-0.85], p =0.03). PPC in pediatric heart transplant evaluations may be associated with less invasive interventions at EOL.

Continuity Strategies for Long-Stay PICU Patients: Consensus Statements From the Lucile Packard Foundation PICU Continuity Panel.

OBJECTIVES: To develop consensus statements on continuity strategies using primary intensivists, primary nurses, and recurring multidisciplinary team meetings for long-stay patients (LSPs) in PICUs. PARTICIPANTS: The multidisciplinary Lucile Packard Foundation PICU Continuity Panel comprising parents of children who had prolonged PICU stays and experts in several specialties/professions that care for children with medical complexity in and out of PICUs. DESIGN/METHODS: We used modified RAND Delphi methodology, with a comprehensive literature review, Delphi surveys, and a conference, to reach consensus. The literature review resulted in a synthesized bibliography, which was provided to panelists. We used an iterative process to generate draft statements following panelists' completion of four online surveys with open-ended questions on implementing and sustaining continuity strategies. Panelists were anonymous when they voted on revised draft statements. Agreement of 80% constituted consensus. At a 3-day virtual conference, we discussed, revised, and re-voted on statements not reaching or barely reaching consensus. We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation to assess the quality of the evidence and rate the statements' strength. The Panel also generated outcome, process, and balancing metrics to evaluate continuity strategies. RESULTS: The Panel endorsed 17 consensus statements in five focus areas of continuity strategies (Eligibility Criteria, Initiation, Standard Responsibilities, Resources Needed to Implement, Resources Needed to Sustain). The quality of evidence of the statements was low to very low, highlighting the limited evidence and the importance of panelists' experiences/expertise. The strength of the statements was conditional. An extensive list of potential evaluation metrics was generated. CONCLUSIONS: These expert/parent-developed consensus statements provide PICUs with novel summaries on how to operationalize, implement, and sustain continuity strategies for LSP, a rapidly growing, vulnerable, resource-intensive population in PICUs.