Identification of Hospitalized Patients Who May Benefit from a Serious Illness Conversation Using the Readmission Risk Score Combined with the Surprise Question.

BACKGROUND: Determining which patients benefit from a serious illness conversation (SIC) is challenging. The authors sought to determine whether Epic's Risk of Readmission Score (RRS), could be combined with a simple, validated, one-question mortality prognostic screen (the surprise question: Would you be surprised if the patient died in the next 12 months?) to identify hospitalized patients with SIC needs. METHODS: In this retrospective study, the authors randomly selected encounters for patients ≥ 18 years of age to a general medicine service from January 2019 to October 2021 who had an RRS > 28%. Two adjudicators independently performed chart reviews for each encounter to answer the surprise question to create two distinct prognostic groups (yes vs. no). Fisher's exact test was used to assess for statistically significant differences in standardized documentation of SICs between groups. RESULTS: Out of 2,879 encounters, 202 patient encounters were randomly selected. Adjudicators answered "no" to the surprise question for 156 (77.2%) patients. Patients for whom adjudicators answered "no" were generally older with higher comorbidity and more often had standardized documentation of a SIC (14 [9.0%] vs. 0.[0.0%], p = 0.042) compared to patients for whom adjudicators answered "yes." CONCLUSION: Approximately three quarters of patients with a high RRS were predicted to have a lifespan of less than a year. Although these patients were significantly more likely to have a SIC, rates of SICs were extremely low. Combining available electronic health record (EHR) data with a simple one-question screening tool may help identify hospitalized patients who require a SIC in quality improvement initiatives.

Timing and content of serious illness conversations for patients with advanced heart failure in a specialty-aligned palliative care service.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced heart failure (AHF) desire communication around values and goals prior to treatment decisions. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the timing and content of the first serious illness communication (SI conversation) for patients with AHF after referral to a specialist palliative care (PC) team (HeartPal). METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we used electronic health records to identify patients referred to HeartPal and their first SI conversations at a tertiary care hospital between October 2018 and September 2021. We used natural language processing and predetermined codes to quantify prevalence of prior goals of care conversations by the cardiology team within six months preceding the HeartPal consultation and the prevalence of hopes, fears, and seven conversation content codes. Consecutive SI conversations and patient outcomes were followed until March 2022. RESULTS: Of 468 patients (mean age: 64 years, 72 % male, 66 % referred for goals of care conversation), 25.2 % had prior documented goals of care conversations preceding the HeartPal consultation. During the study period, 206 (44.0 %) patients died (median time from initial SI conversation to death: 65 days, IQR 206) and 43.2 % engaged in multiple SI conversations before death. SI conversation analysis (n = 324) revealed that patients hoped to "be at home" (74.1 %, n = 240), "be independent" (65.7 %, n = 213) and "live as long as possible" (53.4 %, n = 173). Conversation content included goals of care (83.0 %), strengths (83.0 %), decision-making (79.3 %), spirituality (71.0 %), coping (52.2 %), and prognostic communication (43.5 %). CONCLUSION: Specialist PC service provides documentation of goals and values and offers longitudinal follow-up for patients with AHF.

The Sowers of Seeds: A Qualitative Analysis of the Role of Palliative Care Educators in Facilitating Goals-of-Care Conversations and Palliative Care Referrals.

BACKGROUND: Optimal care for seriously ill and older patients often involves advance care planning (ACP), goals-of-care (GOC) conversations, and specialty palliative care consultation, three sometimes overlapping, yet distinct practices. Insufficient staffing and investment in these areas have limited their availability. OBJECTIVES: We explored the facilitators and barriers to successful implementation of the VIDEO-PCE trial. The intervention aimed to increase patient engagement in ACP, GOC, and by establishing Palliative Care Educators, a new clinical role integrated into existing hospital wards. DESIGN: This qualitative interview study employed a semi-structured interview guide tailored to the interviewee's clinical role. The interviews elicited perceptions of the facilitators and barriers to integration of palliative care educators (PCEs) into existing workflows. We developed deductive codes a priori and inductive codes as we coded interview transcripts. SETTING/SUBJECTS: Medical/surgical floor clinical colleagues, palliative care team members, and PCEs from both participating sites were interviewed. RESULTS: Twenty-four individuals were interviewed (12 clinical staff of medical and surgical wards, seven palliative care team members, and five PCEs). Four themes were identified: (1) The work completed by the PCEs provided a foundation for future palliative care involvement; (2) Constituting the new role in practice required revision and creativity; (3) Communication was important to providing continuity of care; and (4) Establishing trust catalyzed the acceptance of the role. CONCLUSION: The creation and implementation of a new role within existing clinical workflows posed some challenges but were felt to relieve staff from some work burden and allow more patients to engage in ACP and GOC conversations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04857060.

Differences in code status practice patterns among emergency clinicians working in Japan and the United States.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine self-reported code-status practice patterns among emergency clinicians from Japan and the U.S. METHODS: A cross-sectional questionnaire was distributed to emergency clinicians from one academic medical center and four general hospitals in Japan and two academic medical centers in the U.S. The questionnaire was based on a hypothetical case involving a critically ill patient with end-stage lung cancer. The questionnaire items assessed whether respondent clinicians would be likely to pose questions to patients about their preferences for medical procedures and their values and goals. RESULTS: A total of 176 emergency clinicians from Japan and the U.S participated. After adjusting for participants' backgrounds, emergency clinicians in Japan were less likely to pose procedure-based questions than those in the U.S. Conversely, emergency clinicians in Japan showed a statistically higher likelihood of asking 10 out of 12 value-based questions. CONCLUSION: Significant differences were found between emergency clinicians in Japan and the U.S. in their reported practices on posing procedure-based and patient value-based questions. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Serious illness communication training based in the U.S. must be adapted to the Japanese context, considering the cultural characteristics and practical responsibilities of Japanese emergency clinicians.

Content Analysis of Serious Illness Conversation Documentation: Structured vs. Free-Text Information.

CONTEXT: Clear, accessible, and thorough documentation of serious illness conversations helps ensure that critical information patients share with clinicians is reflected in their future care. OBJECTIVES: We sought to characterize and compare serious illness conversations recorded in two different ways in the electronic health record to better understand patterns of serious illness conversation documentation. METHODS: We performed content analysis of serious illness conversations documented in the electronic health record, whether documented via structured tab or free-text clinical notes, for patients (n = 150) with advanced cancer who started a treatment associated with a poor prognosis between October 2020 and June 2022. A multidisciplinary team iteratively developed a codebook to classify serious illness conversation content (e.g., goals/hopes) on a preliminary sample (n = 30), and two researchers performed mixed deductive-inductive coding on the remaining data (n = 120). We reviewed documentation from 34 patients with serious illness conversations documentation in the structured tab only, 43 with documentation in only free-text clinical notes, and 44 with documentation of both types. We then compared content between documentation types. RESULTS: Information documented more frequently in structured tabs included fears/worries and illness understanding; clinical notes more often included treatment preferences, deliberations surrounding advance directives, function, and trade-offs. Qualitative insights highlight a range of length and detail across documentation types, and suggest notable authorship by palliative and social work clinicians. CONCLUSION: How serious illness conversations are documented in the electronic health record may impact the content captured. Future quality improvement efforts should seek to consolidate documentation sources to improve care and information retention.

Assessing fairness in machine learning models: A study of racial bias using matched counterparts in mortality prediction for patients with chronic diseases.

OBJECTIVE: Existing approaches to fairness evaluation often overlook systematic differences in the social determinants of health, like demographics and socioeconomics, among comparison groups, potentially leading to inaccurate or even contradictory conclusions. This study aims to evaluate racial disparities in predicting mortality among patients with chronic diseases using a fairness detection method that considers systematic differences. METHODS: We created five datasets from Mass General Brigham's electronic health records (EHR), each focusing on a different chronic condition: congestive heart failure (CHF), chronic kidney disease (CKD), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), chronic liver disease (CLD), and dementia. For each dataset, we developed separate machine learning models to predict 1-year mortality and examined racial disparities by comparing prediction performances between Black and White individuals. We compared racial fairness evaluation between the overall Black and White individuals versus their counterparts who were Black and matched White individuals identified by propensity score matching, where the systematic differences were mitigated. RESULTS: We identified significant differences between Black and White individuals in age, gender, marital status, education level, smoking status, health insurance type, body mass index, and Charlson comorbidity index (p-value < 0.001). When examining matched Black and White subpopulations identified through propensity score matching, significant differences between particular covariates existed. We observed weaker significance levels in the CHF cohort for insurance type (p = 0.043), in the CKD cohort for insurance type (p = 0.005) and education level (p = 0.016), and in the dementia cohort for body mass index (p = 0.041); with no significant differences for other covariates. When examining mortality prediction models across the five study cohorts, we conducted a comparison of fairness evaluations before and after mitigating systematic differences. We revealed significant differences in the CHF cohort with p-values of 0.021 and 0.001 in terms of F1 measure and Sensitivity for the AdaBoost model, and p-values of 0.014 and 0.003 in terms of F1 measure and Sensitivity for the MLP model, respectively. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: This study contributes to research on fairness assessment by focusing on the examination of systematic disparities and underscores the potential for revealing racial bias in machine learning models used in clinical settings.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Serious Illness Conversation Quality during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

CONTEXT: The COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately impacted non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic patients. However, little is known about the quality of serious illness communication in these communities during this time. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine whether racial and ethnic disparities manifested in serious illness conversations during the pandemic. METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational, cohort study of adult patients with a documented serious illness conversation from March 2020 to April 2021. Serious illness conversation documentation quality was assessed by counting the median number (IQR) of conversation domains and their elements included in the documentation. Domains included (1) values and goals, (2) prognosis and illness understanding, (3) end-of-life care planning, and (4) life-sustaining treatment preferences. A multivariable ordinal logistic regression analysis was conducted to assess associations between differences in serious illness documentation quality with patient race and ethnicity. RESULTS: Among 291 patients, 149 (51.2%) were non-Hispanic White; 81 (27.8%) were non-Hispanic Black; and 61 (21.0%) were Hispanic patients. Non-Hispanic Black patients were associated with fewer domains (OR 0.46 [95% CI 0.25, 0.84]; P=.01) included in their serious illness conversation documentation compared to non-Hispanic White patients. Both non-Hispanic Black (OR 0.35 [95% CI 0.20, 0.62]; P<.001) and Hispanic patients (OR 0.29 [95% CI 0.14, 0.58]; P<.001) were associated with fewer elements in the values and goals domain compared to non-Hispanic White patients in their serious illness documentation. CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, serious illness conversation documentation among non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic patients was less comprehensive compared to non-Hispanic White patients.

Looking Beyond Mortality Prediction: Primary Care Physician Views of Patients' Palliative Care Needs Predicted by a Machine Learning Tool.

OBJECTIVES: To assess primary care physicians' (PCPs) perception of the need for serious illness conversations (SIC) or other palliative care interventions in patients flagged by a machine learning tool for high 1-year mortality risk. METHODS: We surveyed PCPs from four Brigham and Women's Hospital primary care practice sites. Multiple mortality prediction algorithms were ensembled to assess adult patients of these PCPs who were either enrolled in the hospital's integrated care management program or had one of several chronic conditions. The patients were classified as high or low risk of 1-year mortality. A blinded survey had PCPs evaluate these patients for palliative care needs. We measured PCP and machine learning tool agreement regarding patients' need for an SIC/elevated risk of mortality. RESULTS: Of 66 PCPs, 20 (30.3%) participated in the survey. Out of 312 patients evaluated, 60.6% were female, with a mean (standard deviation [SD]) age of 69.3 (17.5) years, and a mean (SD) Charlson Comorbidity Index of 2.80 (2.89). The machine learning tool identified 162 (51.9%) patients as high risk. Excluding deceased or unfamiliar patients, PCPs felt that an SIC was appropriate for 179 patients; the machine learning tool flagged 123 of these patients as high risk (68.7% concordance). For 105 patients whom PCPs deemed SIC unnecessary, the tool classified 83 as low risk (79.1% concordance). There was substantial agreement between PCPs and the tool (Gwet's agreement coefficient of 0.640). CONCLUSIONS: A machine learning mortality prediction tool offers promise as a clinical decision aid, helping clinicians pinpoint patients needing palliative care interventions.

A Mixed Methods Analysis of Standardized Documentation of Serious Illness Conversations Within an Electronic Health Record Module During Hospitalization.

BACKGROUND: Analysis of documented Serious Illness Conversations (SICs) in the inpatient setting can help clinicians align management to address patient and caregiver needs. METHODS: We conducted a mixed methods analysis of the first instance of standardized documentation of a SIC within a structured module among hospitalized general medicine patients from 2018 to 2019. Percentage of documentations that included a description of patient or family understanding of the patient's medical condition and use of radio buttons to answer the "prognostic information shared," "hopes," and "worries" modules are reported. Using grounded theory approach, physicians analyzed free text entries to: "What is important to the patient/family?" and "Recommendations or next steps planned." RESULTS: Out of 5142 patients, 59 patients had a documented SIC. Patient or family understanding of the medical condition(s) was reported in 56 (95%). For "prognostic information shared," the most frequently selected radio buttons were: 49 (83%) incurable disease and 28 (48%) prognosis of weeks to months while those for "hopes" were: 52 (88%) be comfortable and 27 (46%) be at home and for "worries" were: 49 (83%) other physical suffering and 36 (61%) pain. Themes generated from entries to "What's important to patient/family?" included being with loved ones; comfort; mentally and physically present; and reliable care while those for "Recommendations" were coordinating support services; symptom management; and support and communication. CONCLUSIONS: SIC content indicated concern about pain and reliable care suggesting the complex, intensive nature of caring for seriously ill patients and the need to consider SICs earlier in the life course of patients.

Use of cancer-directed therapy at the end of life among adolescents and young adults.

BACKGROUND: Adolescents and young adults frequently receive chemotherapy near death. We know less about the use of targeted agents and immunotherapy or trends over time. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 1836 adolescents and young adults with cancer who died between 2009 and 2019 after receiving care at 1 of 3 sites (Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, and Kaiser Permanente Southern California). We reviewed electronic health data and medical records to examine use of cancer-directed therapy in the last 90 days of life, including chemotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy, and investigational drugs. RESULTS: Over the study period, 35% of adolescents and young adults received chemotherapy in the last 90 days of life; 24% received targeted therapy, 7% immunotherapy, and 5% investigational drugs. Additionally, 56% received at least 1 form of systemic cancer-directed therapy in the last 90 days of life. After adjustment for patient sex, race, ethnicity, age, site of care, diagnosis, and years from diagnosis to death, the proportion of adolescents and young adults receiving targeted therapy (odds ratio [OR] = 1.05 per year of death, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.02 to 1.10; P = .006), immunotherapy (OR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.18 to 1.38; P < .0001), and any cancer-directed therapy (OR = 1.04, 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.08; P = .01) in the last 90 days of life increased over time. CONCLUSIONS: More than half of adolescents and young adults receive cancer therapy in the last 90 days of life, and use of novel agents such as targeted therapy and immunotherapy is increasing over time. Although some adolescents and young adults may wish to continue cancer therapy while living with advanced disease, efforts are needed to ensure that use of cancer-directed therapy meets preferences of adolescents and young adults approaching death.

Kidney Transplant Clinicians' Perceptions of Palliative Care for Patients With Failing Allografts in the US: A Mixed Methods Study.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Kidney transplant patients with failing allografts have a physical and psychological symptom burden as well as high morbidity and mortality. Palliative care is underutilized in this vulnerable population. We described kidney transplant clinicians' perceptions of palliative care to delineate their perceived barriers to and facilitators of providing palliative care to this population. STUDY DESIGN: National explanatory sequential mixed methods study including an online survey and semistructured interviews. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Kidney transplant clinicians in the United States surveyed and interviewed from October 2021 to March 2022. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Descriptive summary of survey responses, thematic analysis of qualitative interviews, and mixed methods integration of data. RESULTS: A total of 149 clinicians completed the survey, and 19 completed the subsequent interviews. Over 90% of respondents agreed that palliative care can be helpful for patients with a failing kidney allograft. However, 46% of respondents disagreed that all patients with failing allografts benefit from palliative care, and two-thirds thought that patients would not want serious illness conversations. More than 90% of clinicians expressed concern that transplant patients and caregivers would feel scared or anxious if offered palliative care. The interviews identified three main themes: (1) transplant clinicians' unique sense of personal and professional responsibility was a barrier to palliative care engagement, (2) clinicians' uncertainty regarding the timing of palliative care collaboration would lead to delayed referral, and (3) clinicians felt challenged by factors related to patients' cultural backgrounds and identities, such as language differences. Many comments reflected an unfamiliarity with the broad scope of palliative care beyond end-of-life care. LIMITATIONS: Potential selection bias. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that multiple barriers related to patients, clinicians, health systems, and health policies may pose challenges to the delivery of palliative care for patients with failing kidney transplants. This study illustrates the urgent need for ongoing efforts to optimize palliative care delivery models dedicated to kidney transplant patients, their families, and the clinicians who serve them. PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Kidney transplant patients experience physical and psychological suffering in the context of their illnesses that may be amenable to palliative care. However, palliative care is often underutilized in this population. In this mixed-methods study, we surveyed 149 clinicians across the United States, and 19 of them completed semistructured interviews. Our study results demonstrate that several patient, clinician, system, and policy factors need to be addressed to improve palliative care delivery to this vulnerable population.

Quality of End-of-Life Care Among Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer.

Adolescents, young adults with cancer receive limited psychosocial and spiritual support near death.

The differences in code status conversation approaches reported by emergency medicine and palliative care clinicians: A mixed-method study.

BACKGROUND: During acute health deterioration, emergency medicine and palliative care clinicians routinely discuss code status (e.g., shared decision making about mechanical ventilation) with seriously ill patients. Little is known about their approaches. We sought to elucidate how code status conversations are conducted by emergency medicine and palliative care clinicians and why their approaches are different. METHODS: We conducted a sequential-explanatory, mixed-method study in three large academic medical centers in the Northeastern United States. Attending physicians and advanced practice providers working in emergency medicine and palliative care were eligible. Among the survey respondents, we purposefully sampled the participants for follow-up interviews. We collected clinicians' self-reported approaches in code status conversations and their rationales. A survey with a 5-point Likert scale ("very unlikely" to "very likely") was used to assess the likelihood of asking about medical procedures (procedure based) and patients' values (value based) during code status conversations, followed by semistructured interviews. RESULTS: Among 272 clinicians approached, 206 completed the survey (a 76% response rate). The reported approaches differed greatly (e.g., 91% of palliative care clinicians reported asking about a patient's acceptable quality of life compared to 59% of emergency medicine clinicians). Of the 206 respondents, 118 (57%) agreed to subsequent interviews; our final number of semistructured interviews included seven emergency medicine clinicians and nine palliative care clinicians. The palliative care clinicians stated that the value-based questions offer insight into patients' goals, which is necessary for formulating a recommendation. In contrast, emergency medicine clinicians stated that while value-based questions are useful, they are vague and necessitate extended discussions, which are inappropriate during emergencies. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency medicine and palliative care clinicians reported conducting code status conversations differently. The rationales may be shaped by their clinical practices and experiences.

The Association of Standardized Documentation of Serious Illness Conversations With Healthcare Utilization in Hospitalized Patients: A Propensity Score Matched Cohort Analysis.

Background: Serious Illness Conversations (SICs) conducted during hospitalization can lead to meaningful patient participation in the decision-making process affecting medical management. The aim of this study is to determine if standardized documentation of a SIC within an institutionally approved EHR module during hospitalization is associated with palliative care consultation, change in code status, hospice enrollment prior to discharge, and 90-day readmissions. Methods: We conducted retrospective analyses of hospital encounters of general medicine patients at a community teaching hospital affiliated with an academic medical center from October 2018 to August 2019. Encounters with standardized documentation of a SIC were identified and matched by propensity score to control encounters without a SIC in a ratio of 1:3. We used multivariable, paired logistic regression and Cox proportional-hazards modeling to assess key outcomes. Results: Of 6853 encounters (5143 patients), 59 (.86%) encounters (59 patients) had standardized documentation of a SIC, and 58 (.85%) were matched to 167 control encounters (167 patients). Encounters with standardized documentation of a SIC had greater odds of palliative care consultation (odds ratio [OR] 60.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 12.45-290.08, P < .01), a documented code status change (OR 8.04, 95% CI 1.54-42.05, P = .01), and discharge with hospice services (OR 35.07, 95% CI 5.80-212.08, P < .01) compared to matched controls. There was no significant association with 90-day readmissions (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] .88, standard error [SE] .37, P = .73). Conclusions: Standardized documentation of a SIC during hospitalization is associated with palliative care consultation, change in code status, and hospice enrollment.

What Constitutes Quality of Life? Perspectives of Adolescents and Young Adults With Advanced Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with advanced cancer identify maintaining a good quality of life (QoL) as a central goal of end-of-life care. QoL is a dynamic and subjective overarching concept that refers to an individual's relative satisfaction with their own life. Despite its importance to AYAs with advanced cancer, a patient-centered definition of QoL is lacking in this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This qualitative secondary analysis of semistructured interviews was conducted across 3 institutions and 1 online support community among AYA patients with advanced cancer, family caregivers, and health care providers who cared for living or recently deceased AYAs. Interviewees were asked about priorities in receipt of care. Interviews were transcribed using NVivo software for primary analysis, and previously coded excerpts were screened for references to QoL. Relevant excerpts were sorted into organizing domains. RESULTS: Participants included 23 AYA patients, 28 family caregivers, and 29 health care providers (including physicians, nurses, nurse practitioners, social workers, and psychologists). Four domains of QoL were identified: psychosocial and physical well-being, dignity, normalcy, and personal and family relationships. Within each domain there was agreement across AYAs, caregivers, and health care providers, with nuanced perspectives provided by AYAs of different ages. Personal and family relationships was the most frequently referenced domain of QoL among all participants. A common feature of each domain was that adaptation to current circumstances impacted perspectives on QoL. Patients valued active participation in the development of a care plan that supported these domains. CONCLUSIONS: AYAs with advanced cancer, their caregivers, and health care providers agree on several broad domains of QoL in this population. To provide high-quality, patient-centered care, care plans should integrate these domains to enable AYAs to maximize their QoL throughout their advanced cancer care.

Video Intervention and Goals-of-Care Documentation in Hospitalized Older Adults: The VIDEO-PCE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Despite the benefits of goals-of-care (GOC) communication, many hospitalized individuals never communicate their goals or preferences to clinicians. Objective: To assess whether a GOC video intervention delivered by palliative care educators (PCEs) increased the rate of GOC documentation. Design, Setting, and Participants: This pragmatic, stepped-wedge cluster randomized clinical trial included patients aged 65 years or older admitted to 1 of 14 units at 2 urban hospitals in New York and Boston from July 1, 2021, to October 31, 2022. Intervention: The intervention involved PCEs (social workers and nurses trained in GOC communication) facilitating GOC conversations with patients and/or their decision-makers using a library of brief, certified video decision aids available in 29 languages. Patients in the control period received usual care. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary outcome was GOC documentation, which included any documentation of a goals conversation, limitation of life-sustaining treatment, palliative care, hospice, or time-limited trials and was obtained by natural language processing. Results: A total of 10 802 patients (mean [SD] age, 78 [8] years; 51.6% male) were admitted to 1 of 14 hospital units. Goals-of-care documentation during the intervention phase occurred among 3744 of 6023 patients (62.2%) compared with 2396 of 4779 patients (50.1%) in the usual care phase (P < .001). Proportions of documented GOC discussions for Black or African American individuals (865 of 1376 [62.9%] vs 596 of 1125 [53.0%]), Hispanic or Latino individuals (311 of 548 [56.8%] vs 218 of 451 [48.3%]), non-English speakers (586 of 1059 [55.3%] vs 405 of 863 [46.9%]), and people living with Alzheimer disease and related dementias (520 of 681 [76.4%] vs 355 of 570 [62.3%]) were greater during the intervention phase compared with the usual care phase. Conclusions and Relevance: In this stepped-wedge cluster randomized clinical trial of older adults, a GOC video intervention delivered by PCEs resulted in higher rates of GOC documentation compared with usual care, including among Black or African American individuals, Hispanic or Latino individuals, non-English speakers, and people living with Alzheimer disease and related dementias. The findings suggest that this form of patient-centered care delivery may be a beneficial decision support tool. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04857060.

Adding Pals to KidneyPal: Creating a Virtual Patient and Family Advisory Council for Kidney Palliative Care.

Patient and family advisory councils (PFACs) represent one method of engaging patients and families in clinical program development and research, but existing practices too often exclude marginalized and minority voices. As a kidney palliative care team (KidneyPal) at a large academic medical center, we sought to create a PFAC that explicitly considered equity and inclusion in its approach to advisor recruitment. We developed two major innovations to reduce selection bias in our KidneyPal PFAC: adaptation to an entirely virtual process and alteration of the advisor recruitment and enrollment process. We eliminated several potential barriers to participation for our patients and their family members, a population with higher rates of advanced age, nonwhite ethnicity, and limited English proficiency than the local general population. We removed application requirements including lengthy online training modules, detailed employment history, a personal essay, and a criminal background check. The KidneyPal PFAC may act as a model for improving equity and inclusion in virtual patient advisory councils.

Discussions About Goals of Care and Advance Care Planning Among Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer Approaching the End of Life.

PURPOSE: Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer receive high rates of medically intensive measures at the end of life. This study aimed to characterize the prevalence and timing of conversations about goals of care and advance care planning among AYAs at the end of life as one potential influence on care received. METHODS: This was a review of electronic health data and medical records for 1,929 AYAs age 12-39 years who died after receiving care at one of three sites between 2003 and 2019, including documented conversations about goals of care and advance care planning, and care received. RESULTS: A majority of AYAs were female (54%) and White (61%); 12% were Asian, 8% Black, and 27% Hispanic. Most patients had documented discussions about prognosis (86%), goals of care (83%), palliative care (79%), hospice (79%), and preferred location of death (64%). When last documented goals of care were evaluated, 69% of patients wanted care focused on palliation; however, 29% of those with palliative goals spent time in the intensive care unit (ICU) in the last month of life, and 32% had multiple emergency room (ER) visits. When goals-of-care discussions happened earlier, >30 days before death, AYAs were less likely to receive chemotherapy in the last 14 days of life (P = .001), ICU care (P < .001), ER visits (P < .001), and hospitalizations in the last month (P < .001). CONCLUSION: High rates of medically intensive measures among AYAs near the end of life do not appear to be the result of a lack of discussions about goals of care and advance care planning. Although some interventions may be used to support palliative goals, earlier discussions have potential to reduce late-life intensive measures.

Patient, Caregiver, and Clinician Perspectives on Core Components of Therapeutic Alliance for Adolescents and Young Adults With Advanced Cancer: A Qualitative Study.

Importance: The patient-clinician therapeutic alliance is an important aspect of high-quality cancer care. However, components of the therapeutic alliance in adolescents and young adults (AYAs, aged 12-39 years) with cancer have not been defined. Objective: To identify components of and barriers to the therapeutic alliance between AYAs, caregivers, and clinicians from the perspective of all key stakeholders. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this qualitative study, semistructured in-depth interviews with patients, caregivers, and clinicians were conducted from 2018 to 2021 with no additional follow-up, with content analysis of resulting transcripts. Participants were recruited from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, and an online cancer support community (Cactus Cancer Society). Eligible participants were English- or Spanish-speaking. Eligible patients were aged 12 to 39 years with stage IV or recurrent cancer. Eligible caregivers cared for an AYA living with advanced cancer or one who had died within 5 years. Eligible clinicians routinely provided care for AYAs with cancer. Main Outcomes and Measures: Perspectives on therapeutic alliance. Results: Interviews were conducted with 80 participants: 23 were patients (48% were female; 78% were White), 28 were caregivers (82% were female; 50% were White), and 29 were clinicians (69% were female; 45% were White). The mean (SD) age of patients was 29 (7.3) years. Interviews identified 6 components of therapeutic alliance: (1) compassion; (2) sense of connection; (3) clinician presence; (4) information sharing; (5) shared goals; and (6) individualization of care. While some domains were represented in prior models of therapeutic alliance, a unique domain was identified related to the need for individualization of the approach to care for AYA patients and their caregivers. Interviews also identified potential barriers to building the therapeutic alliance specific to the AYA population, including managing discordant needs between patients and caregivers and communication challenges at the end of life. Conclusions and Relevance: This study identified core components and barriers to building therapeutic alliance in the AYA advanced cancer population from the perspective of all the key stakeholders in the relationship. A novel component highlighting the need for individualization was identified. This model enables a deeper understanding of how to build therapeutic alliance in the AYA advanced cancer population, which may guide clinician training and facilitate improved care for this vulnerable population.