Let Us Have the Conversation: Serious Illness Communication in Oncology: Definitions, Barriers, and Successful Approaches.

Serious illness communications are crucial elements of care delivery for patients with cancer. High-quality serious illness communications are composed of open, honest discussions between patients, caregivers, and clinicians regarding patient's communication preferences, expected illness trajectory, prognosis, and risks and benefits of any recommended care. High-quality communication ideally starts at the time of a patients' cancer diagnosis, allows space for and response to patient emotions, elicits patients' values and care preferences, and is iterative and longitudinal. When integrated into cancer care, such communication can result in improved patient experiences with their care, care that matches patients' goals, and reduced care intensity at the end of life. Despite national recommendations for routine integration of these communication into cancer care, a minority of patients with cancer receive such communication. In this chapter, we describe elements of high-quality serious illness communication, patient-, clinician-, institution-, and payer-level barriers, and successful strategies that can routinely integrate such communication into cancer care delivery.

Attitudes and Beliefs Regarding Pain Medicine: Results of a National Palliative Physician Survey.

CONTEXT: Pain is a prevalent symptom in patients with serious illness and often requires interventional approaches for adequate treatment. Little is known about referral patterns and collaborative attitudes of palliative physicians regarding pain management specialists. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate referral rates, co-management strategies, and beliefs of palliative physicians about the value of Pain Medicine specialists in patients with serious illness. METHODS: A 30-question survey with demographic, referral/practice, and attitudes/belief questions was mailed to 1000 AAHPM physician members. Responses were characterized with descriptive statistics and further analyzed for associations between training experiences, practice environment, and educational activities with collaborative practice patterns and beliefs. RESULTS: The response rate was 52.6%. Most survey respondents had initial board certification primarily in internal medicine (n = 286, 56%) or family medicine (n = 144, 28%). A minority of respondents had completed a formal ABMS Hospice and Palliative Medicine fellowship (n = 178, 34%). Respondents had been in practice for a median of nine years, (range 1-38 years) primarily in community hospitals (n = 249, 47%) or academic hospitals (n = 202, 38%). The variables best associated with collaborative practices and attitudes was practice in an academic hospital setting and participation in regular joint academic conferences with pain medicine clinicians. CONCLUSION: This study shows that Palliative Care physicians have highly positive attitudes toward Pain Medicine specialists, but referrals remain low. Facilitating professional collaboration via joint educational/clinical sessions is one possible solution to drive ongoing interprofessional care in patients with complex pain.

Palliative care utilization in calciphylaxis: a single-center retrospective review of 121 patients (1999-2016).

BACKGROUND: Calciphylaxis is a debilitating dermatological condition associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Palliative care offers a multidisciplinary approach to addressing symptoms and goals of care in patients with serious medical diagnoses. Involvement of palliative services for calciphylaxis is infrequently reported in the literature. The purpose of this report is to assess rates of palliative and pain consultation for patients with calciphylaxis. METHODS: This is a comprehensive, single-institution retrospective chart review of 121 eligible patients with a diagnosis of calciphylaxis treated at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, from 1999 to 2016. Inclusion criteria were an indisputable diagnosis of calciphylaxis based on clinical, histopathologic, and radiographic features. One hundred twenty-one patients met inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients (42%) received either a palliative (n = 15) or pain (n = 20) consultation, or both (n = 16). Patients with a palliative care consultation were younger compared with those without (mean ages 57 vs. 62 years, P = 0.046). In 104 patients (86%), psychiatric symptoms were not assessed. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of patients with calciphylaxis, the majority do not receive palliative and pain care consultations. Psychiatric complications are inconsistently addressed. These observations highlight practice gaps in the care of patients with calciphylaxis.

Impact of Massage Therapy on the Quality of Life of Hospice Patients and Their Caregivers: A Pilot Study.

Evidence for massage therapy (MT) in hospice patients remains limited. We conducted a prospective pilot study on MTs impact on quality of life of hospice patients and caregivers. Patient-caregiver dyads were enrolled if patients scored ≥5 on pain, depression, anxiety, or well-being using the revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Revised (ESAS-r). The patient received MT weekly for up to 3 massages with assessments completed at baseline, after each massage, and 1 week after the final massage for patients and at baseline and 1 week after final massage for caregivers. A satisfaction survey was completed at study completion. A pro-rated area under the curve (AUC) was utilized to assess the primary endpoints of change in ESAS-r for patient ratings of pain, depression and anxiety as well as the Linear Analogue Self-Assessment (LASA). Median difference scores (end of study value)-(baseline value) for each participant and caregiver were calculated. Of 27 patients and caregivers enrolled, 25 patients received MT. Fifteen patients completed all 3 MT sessions and were given the final symptom assessment and satisfaction survey and their caregivers completed final assessments. The proportion of patients considered success (AUC > baseline) in the primary endpoints were the following: pain 40.9%, depression 40.9%, anxiety 54.5%, LASA 54.5%. Median difference scores were largely zero indicating no significant temporal change in symptoms. Patients were highly satisfied with MT. This pilot study indicated that MT was a feasible and well-received intervention in our population of patients with inadequately controlled symptoms.

Perceptions of Hematology Among Palliative Care Physicians: Results of a Nationwide Survey.

CONTEXT: Palliative care integration for patients with hematologic diseases has lagged behind solid-organ malignancies. Previous work has characterized hematologist perspectives, but less is known about palliative care physician views of this phenomenon. OBJECTIVES: To examine palliative care physician attitudes and beliefs regarding hematologic diseases, patient care, and collaboration. METHODS: A 44-item survey containing Likert and free-response items was mailed to 1000 AAHPM physician members. Sections explored respondent comfort with specific diagnoses, palliative care integration, relationships with hematologists, and hematology-specific patient care. Logistic regression models with generalized estimating equations were used to compare parallel Likert responses. Free responses were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: The response rate was 55.5%. Respondents reported comfort managing symptoms in leukemia (84.0%), lymphoma (92.1%), multiple myeloma (92.9%), and following hematopoietic stem cell transplant (51.6%). Fewer expressed comfort with understanding disease trajectory (64.9%, 75.7%, 78.5%, and 35.4%) and discussing prognosis (71.0%, 82.6%, 81.6%, and 40.6%). 97.6% of respondents disagreed that palliative care and hematology are incompatible. 50.6% felt that palliative care physicians' limited hematology-specific knowledge hinders collaboration. 89.4% felt that relapse should trigger referral. 80.0% felt that hospice referrals occurred late. In exploring perceptions of hematology-palliative care relationships, three themes were identified: misperceptions of palliative care, desire for integration, and lacking a shared model of understanding. CONCLUSION: These data inform efforts to integrate palliative care into hematologic care at large, echoing previous studies of hematologist perspectives. Palliative care physicians express enthusiasm for caring for these patients, desire for improved understanding of palliative care, and ongoing opportunities to improve hematology-specific knowledge and skills.

Improving the delivery of palliative care through predictive modeling and healthcare informatics.

OBJECTIVE: Access to palliative care (PC) is important for many patients with uncontrolled symptom burden from serious or complex illness. However, many patients who could benefit from PC do not receive it early enough or at all. We sought to address this problem by building a predictive model into a comprehensive clinical framework with the aims to (i) identify in-hospital patients likely to benefit from a PC consult, and (ii) intervene on such patients by contacting their care team. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Electronic health record data for 68 349 inpatient encounters in 2017 at a large hospital were used to train a model to predict the need for PC consult. This model was published as a web service, connected to institutional data pipelines, and consumed by a downstream display application monitored by the PC team. For those patients that the PC team deems appropriate, a team member then contacts the patient's corresponding care team. RESULTS: Training performance AUC based on a 20% holdout validation set was 0.90. The most influential variables were previous palliative care, hospital unit, Albumin, Troponin, and metastatic cancer. The model has been successfully integrated into the clinical workflow making real-time predictions on hundreds of patients per day. The model had an "in-production" AUC of 0.91. A clinical trial is currently underway to assess the effect on clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: A machine learning model can effectively predict the need for an inpatient PC consult and has been successfully integrated into practice to refer new patients to PC.

Inpatient Palliative Care Use in Patients With Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: Temporal Trends, Predictors, and Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a progressive disease associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Despite the negative impact of PAH on quality of life and survival, data on use of specialty palliative care services (PCS) is scarce. RESEARCH QUESTION: We sought to evaluate the inpatient use of PCS in patients with PAH. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Using the National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample, 30,495 admissions with a primary diagnosis of PAH were identified from 2001 through 2017. The primary outcome of interest was temporal trends and predictors of inpatient PCS use in patients with PAH. RESULTS: The inpatient use of PCS was low (2.2%), but increased during the study period from 0.5% in 2001 to 7.6% in 2017, with a significant increase starting in 2009. White race, private insurance, higher socioeconomic status, hospital-specific factors, higher comorbidity burden (Charlson Comorbidity Index), cardiac and noncardiac organ failure, and use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and noninvasive mechanical ventilation were independent predictors of increased PCS use. PCS use was associated with a higher prevalence of do-not-resuscitate status, a longer length of stay, higher hospitalization costs, and increased in-hospital mortality with less frequent discharges to home, likely because these patients were also sicker (higher comorbidity index and illness acuity). INTERPRETATION: The inpatient use of PCS in patients with PAH is low, but has been increasing over recent years. Despite increased PCS use over time, patient- and hospital-specific disparities in PCS use continue. Further studies evaluating these disparities and the role of PCS in the comprehensive care of PAH patients are warranted.

Curing Opioid Toxicity with Intrathecal Targeted Drug Delivery.

Pain is one of the most feared symptoms that concern cancer patients and their families. Despite well-established guidelines set forth by the World Health Organization (WHO) on the treatment of cancer pain, nearly half of cancer patients report poorly controlled pain. One of the most serious side effects of systemic oral opioid use is neurotoxicity, which is characterized by altered mental status and systemic neurologic impairments. Treatment strategies are supportive in nature and focused on reducing or changing the offending opioid and correcting any metabolic deficiencies. Herein, we discuss a case of opioid-induced neurotoxicity treated with intrathecal targeted drug delivery (TDD). The timing and implementation of advanced therapies such as intrathecal TDD is not well delineated. More importantly, patients and their oncologic providers are often unaware of this useful tool in treating challenging cancer-associated pain and significantly minimizing systemic opioid side effects. To ensure that patients have comprehensive oncologic care, best-practice guidelines suggest involvement of an interdisciplinary team and coordinated care. Early referral to a pain and palliative specialist may allow for improved patient outcomes and removal of unnecessary barriers to optimal patient care.

Attitudes of Hospice Providers Regarding Intrathecal Targeted Drug Delivery for Patients With Cancer.

Pain is one of the most commonly experienced and feared symptoms faced by patients with a serious illness. For these patients, intrathecal drug delivery systems (IDDSs) provide greater potency and/or few systemic side effects. However, despite these benefits, the integration and management of IDDS for patients receiving hospice care has not been previous studied. An electronic, 18-question survey was sent to 200 hospice practitioners (physicians, nurse practitioners and nurses) in the state of Minnesota to explore their experience, confidence, and the perceived barriers to caring for patients with IDDS while being cared for on hospice. Providers were identified though mailing lists from the Minnesota Network of Hospice and Palliative Care organization. The survey was administered by the Mayo Clinic Survey Research Center with institutional review board approval. Slightly more than 50% of respondents have ever cared for a patient with an intrathecal pump. If a patient had a pump in place, only 28% of providers expressed confidence in managing their pain. Additionally, only 3 of 10 respondents felt that adjusting an intrathecal pump should be the first option when a patient with an IDDS in place had increased pain. Indeed, the vast majority (over 80%) of respondents preferred the use of systemic therapies for primary pain management. Access to IDDS vendors for changes/refills in the home is identified as another barrier with over 50% of respondents either unaware of an available vendor or reporting no vendor available. There are numerous self-reported barriers to ongoing use of IDDS with patients receiving hospice care.

Resurgence of Eating Disorders with Olanzapine.

BACKGROUND: Olanzapine is commonly utilized in palliative care for the treatment of nausea, and a known side effect of olanzapine is increased appetite. Olanzapine is also known to cause re-emergence of eating disorders (EDs) in patients utilizing olanzapine for its antipsychotic effects. It is unclear to what extent this may also occur in patients with serious/life-limiting illness. METHODS AND RESULTS: We present a case of a 70-year-old female with recurrent ovarian cancer and a history of bulimia nervosa (BN) that developed resurgence of her BN after initiation of olanzapine for cancer-associated nausea. Her BN resolved with reducing the dose of olanzapine. CONCLUSION: It is important to recognize that recurrence of EDs can occur when using olanzapine in the palliative care setting.

End-of-Life Care for Seriously Ill International Patients at a Global Destination Medical Center.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the end-of-life care of all international patients who died at a global destination medical center from January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2015. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of all adult international patients who died at a global destination medical center from January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2015. RESULTS: Eighty-two international patients from 25 countries and 5 continents died during the study period (median age, 59.5 years; 59% male). Of the study cohort, 11% (n=9) completed an advance directive, 61% (n=50) died in the intensive care unit, 26% (n=21) had a full code order at the time of death, and 73% (n=19 of 26) receiving cardiopulmonary resuscitation did not survive the resuscitation process. CONCLUSION: Seriously ill international patients who travel to receive health care in the United States face many barriers to receiving high-quality end-of-life care. Seriously ill international patients are coming to the United States in increasing numbers, and little is known about their end-of-life care. There are many unique needs in the care of this complex patient population, and further research is needed to understand how to provide high-quality end-of-life care to these patients.

The Organ Transplant Imperative.

More than 120,000 US patients were listed for solid organ transplants in 2016. Although data are scarce, we suspect that many of these patients will die while awaiting transplant and without engaging in goals-of-care discussions with their physicians. The challenges of addressing goals of care in patients with malignancy, end-stage renal disease, and heart failure have been studied. However, there is sparse literature on addressing goals of care throughout the dynamic process of transplant assessment and listing. We propose the concept of an organ transplant imperative, which is the perceived obligation by patients and health care providers to proceed with organ transplant and to avoid advance care planning and triggered goals-of-care discussions, even in situations in which patients' clinical trajectories have worsened, resulting in poor quality of life and low likelihood of meaningful survival. We situate this concept within the paradigms of clinical inertia and the treatment and technological imperatives. We illustrate this concept by describing a patient with end-stage liver disease (ESLD) who was hoping for a liver transplant, who was caught between the conflicting perspectives of specialist and primary care physicians, and who died of complications of ESLD without experiencing the benefits of advance care planning. Greater awareness of the transplant imperative should generate a shared understanding among specialists, generalists, and patients and will provide opportunities for more formalized involvement of palliative medicine experts in the care of transplant patients.

Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Intrathecal Drug Delivery System Implantation.

INTRODUCTION: Intrathecal drug delivery systems (IDDSs) have dramatically improved analgesia and the functional status of cancer patients and those with chronic pain states. However, given the close proximity to the neuraxis and frequent concomitant use of antiplatelet or anticoagulant medications, this intervention is not without risk. The goal of this investigation was to determine the incidence of bleeding complications following IDDS placement. METHODS: This is a retrospective review from 2005 through 2014 of adult patients undergoing IDDS implantation or revision at a tertiary care center. The primary outcome was a bleeding-related neurological complication requiring emergency medicine, neurology, or neurosurgical evaluation within 31 days. RESULTS: A total of 247 procedures were performed on 216 unique patients. Patients received aspirin or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) within seven days of needle placement for 64 procedures (25.9%). A preprocedural platelet count or international normalized ratio (INR) was available within 30 days for 138 procedures (55.9%). Of these, two patients had a platelet count lower than 100 x 109/L and one patient had an INR of 1.5 or higher at the time of the procedure. One neurological complication was identified (0.4%) that was not related to procedural bleeding. Similarly, three patients (1.2%) received a periprocedural red blood cell transfusion, none of which were related to procedural bleeding. CONCLUSION: No cases of bleeding-related neurological complications were identified following IDDS placement or revision, including in those receiving aspirin or NSAIDs. Future investigations with larger numbers are needed to further explore the safety of antithrombotic therapy continuation or discontinuation periprocedurally.

Providing Appropriate End-of-Life Care to Religious and Ethnic Minorities.

There is overwhelming evidence that racial and ethnic minorities face multiple health care disparities. Recognizing and addressing cultural and religious/spiritual (RS) values is a critical aspect of providing goal-concordant care for patients facing a serious illness, especially at the end of life. Failure to address a patient's cultural and RS needs can lead to diminished quality of care and worse health outcomes. Given the multitude of cultural and RS values, we believe that a framework of cultural and RS curiosity along with a willingness to engage patients in discussions about these elements of their care within an interdisciplinary team should be the goal of all providers who are discussing goals, preferences, and values with patients facing advanced terminal illness.

Dying With a Left Ventricular Assist Device as Destination Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Despite the ability of left ventricular assist device as destination therapy (DT-LVAD) to prolong survival for many patients with advanced heart failure, little is known about the eventual end-of-life care that patients with DT-LVAD receive. METHODS AND RESULTS: All patients undergoing DT-LVAD at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, from January 1, 2007, to September 30, 2014, who subsequently died before July 1, 2015, were included. Information about end-of-life care was obtained from documentation in the electronic medical record. Of 89 patients who died with a DT-LVAD, the median (25th-75th percentile) time from left ventricular assist device implantation to death was 14 (4-31) months. The most common causes of death were multiorgan failure (26%), hemorrhagic stroke (24%), and progressive heart failure (21%). Nearly half (46%) of the patients saw palliative care within 1 month before death; however, only 13 (15%) patients enrolled in hospice a median 11 (range 1-315) days before death. Most patients (78%) died in the hospital, of which 88% died in the intensive care unit. In total, 49 patients had their left ventricular assist device deactivated before death, with all but 3 undergoing deactivation in the hospital. Most patients died within an hour of left ventricular assist device deactivation and all within 26 hours. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to the general heart failure population, most patients with DT-LVAD die in the hospital and few use hospice. Further work is needed to understand these differences and to determine whether patients with DT-LVAD are receiving optimal end-of-life care.

Palliative Sedation and What Constitutes Active Dying: A Case of Severe Progressive Dystonia and Intractable Pain.

We present the case of a 34-year-old woman with Klippel-Feil syndrome who developed progressive generalized dystonia of unclear etiology, resulting in intractable pain despite aggressive medical and surgical interventions. Ultimately, palliative sedation was required to relieve suffering. Herein, we describe ethical considerations including defining sedation, determining prognosis in the setting of an undefined neurodegenerative condition, and use of treatments that concurrently might prolong or alter end-of-life trajectory. We highlight pertinent literature and how it may be applied in challenging and unique clinical situations. Finally, we discuss the need for expert multidisciplinary involvement when implementing palliative sedation and illustrate that procedures and rules need to be interpreted to deliver optimal patient-centered plan of care.

A survey of clinician attitudes and self-reported practices regarding end-of-life care in heart failure.

BACKGROUND: As heart failure often follows an unpredictable clinical trajectory, there has been an impetus to promote iterative patient-provider discussions regarding prognosis and preferences for end-of-life care. AIM: To examine clinicians' practices, expectations, and personal level of confidence in discussing goals of care and providing end-of-life care to their patients with heart failure. DESIGN: Multi-site clinician survey. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants at Mayo Clinic (Rochester, Minnesota, USA) and its surrounding health system were asked to participate in an electronic survey in October 2013. Tertiary Care Cardiology, Community Cardiology, and Primary Care clinicians were surveyed. RESULTS: A total of 95 clinicians participated (52.5% response rate). Only 12% of clinicians reported having annual end-of-life discussions as advocated by the American Heart Association. In total, 52% of clinicians hesitated to discuss end-of-life care citing provider discomfort (11%), perception of patient (21%) or family (12%) unreadiness, fear of destroying hope (9%), or lack of time (8%). Tertiary and Community Cardiology clinicians (66%) attributed responsibility for end-of-life discussions to the heart failure cardiologist, while 66% of Primary Care clinicians felt it was their responsibility. Overall, 30% of clinicians reported a low or very low level of confidence in one or more of the following: initiating prognosis or end-of-life discussions, enrolling patients in hospice, or providing end-of-life care. Most clinicians expressed interest in further skills acquisition. CONCLUSION: Clinicians vary in their views and approaches to end-of-life discussions and care. Some lack confidence and most are interested in further skills acquisition.