Differences in end-of-life care patterns between types of hospice used for cancer patients: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In response to the rapid aging population and increasing number of cancer patients, discussions on dignified end-of-life (EoL) decisions are active around the world. Therefore, this study aimed to identify the differences in EoL care patterns between types of hospice used for cancer patients. METHODS: In this population-based cohort study, the Korean National Health Insurance Service cohort data containing all registered cancer patients who died between 2017 and 2021 were used. A total of 408,964 individuals were eligible for analysis. The variable of interest, the type of hospice used in the 6 months before death, was classified as follows: (1) Non-hospice users; (2) Hospital-based hospice single users; (3) Home-based hospice single users; (4) Combined hospice users. The outcomes were set as patterns of care, including intense care and supportive care. To identify differences in care patterns between hospice types, a generalized linear model with zero-inflated negative binomial distribution was applied. RESULTS: Hospice enrollment was associated with less intense care and more supportive care near death. Notably, those who used combined hospice care had the lowest probability and frequency of receiving intense care (aOR: 0.18, 95% CI: 0.17-0.19, aRR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.44-0.49), while home-based hospice single users had the highest probability and frequency of receiving supportive care (Prescription for narcotic analgesics, aOR: 2.95, 95% CI: 2.69-3.23, aRR: 1.45, 95% CI: 1.41-1.49; Mental health care, aOR: 3.40, 95% CI: 3.13-3.69, aRR: 1.35, 95% CI: 1.31-1.39). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that although intense care for life-sustaining decreases with hospice enrollment, QoL at the EoL actually improves with appropriate supportive care. This study is meaningful in that it not only offers valuable insight into hospice care for terminally ill patients, but also provides policy implications for the introduction of patient-centered community-based hospice services.

Preferred and actual place of death in haematological malignancies: a report from the UK haematological malignancy research network.

OBJECTIVES: Hospital death is comparatively common in people with haematological cancers, but little is known about patient preferences. This study investigated actual and preferred place of death, concurrence between these and characteristics of preferred place discussions. METHODS: Set within a population-based haematological malignancy patient cohort, adults (≥18 years) diagnosed 2004-2012 who died 2011-2012 were included (n=963). Data were obtained via routine linkages (date, place and cause of death) and abstraction of hospital records (diagnosis, demographics, preferred place discussions). Logistic regression investigated associations between patient and clinical factors and place of death, and factors associated with the likelihood of having a preferred place discussion. RESULTS: Of 892 patients (92.6%) alive 2 weeks after diagnosis, 58.0% subsequently died in hospital (home, 20.0%; care home, 11.9%; hospice, 10.2%). A preferred place discussion was documented for 453 patients (50.8%). Discussions were more likely in women (p=0.003), those referred to specialist palliative care (p<0.001), and where cause of death was haematological cancer (p<0.001); and less likely in those living in deprived areas (p=0.005). Patients with a discussion were significantly (p<0.05) less likely to die in hospital. Last recorded preferences were: home (40.6%), hospice (18.1%), hospital (17.7%) and care home (14.1%); two-thirds died in their final preferred place. Multiple discussions occurred for 58.3% of the 453, with preferences varying by proximity to death and participants in the discussion. CONCLUSION: Challenges remain in ensuring that patients are supported to have meaningful end-of-life discussions, with healthcare services that are able to respond to changing decisions over time.

Safety, Efficacy, and Patient Satisfaction with Initial Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters Compared with Usual Intravenous Access in Terminally Ill Cancer Patients: A Randomized Phase II Study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether routine insertion of peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) at admission to a hospice-palliative care (HPC) unit is acceptable in terms of safety and efficacy and whether it results in superior patient satisfaction compared to usual intravenous (IV) access. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Terminally ill cancer patients were randomly assigned to two arms: routine PICC access and usual IV access arm. The primary endpoint was IV maintenance success rate, defined as the rate of functional IV maintenance until the intended time (discharge, transfer, or death). RESULTS: A total of 66 terminally ill cancer patients were enrolled and randomized to study arms. Among them, 57 patients (routine PICC, 29; usual IV, 28) were analyzed. In the routine PICC arm, mean time to PICC was 0.84 days (range, 0 to 3 days), 27 patients maintained PICC with function until the intended time. In the usual IV arm, 11 patients maintained peripheral IV access until the intended time, and 15 patients underwent PICC insertion. The IV maintenance success rate in the routine PICC arm (27/29, 93.1%) was similar to that in the usual IV arm (26/28, 92.8%, p=0.958). Patient satisfaction at day 5 was better in the routine PICC arm (97%, 'a little comfort' or 'much comfort') compared with the usual IV arm (21%) (p <0.001). CONCLUSION: Routine PICC insertion in terminally ill cancer patients was comparable in safety and efficacy and resulted in superior satisfaction compared with usual IV access. Thus, routine PICC insertion could be considered at admission to the HPC unit.

A non-lab nomogram of survival prediction in home hospice care patients with gastrointestinal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients suffering from gastrointestinal cancer comprise a large group receiving home hospice care in China, however, little is known about the prediction of their survival time. This study aimed to develop a gastrointestinal cancer-specific non-lab nomogram predicting survival time in home-based hospice. METHODS: We retrospectively studied the patients with gastrointestinal cancer from a home-based hospice between 2008 and 2018. General baseline characteristics, disease-related characteristics, and related assessment scale scores were collected from the case records. The data were randomly split into a training set (75%) for developing a predictive nomogram and a testing set (25%) for validation. A non-lab nomogram predicting the 30-day and 60-day survival probability was created using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) Cox regression. We evaluated the performance of our predictive model by means of the area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and calibration curve. RESULTS: A total of 1618 patients were included and divided into two sets: 1214 patients (110 censored) as training dataset and 404 patients (33 censored) as testing dataset. The median survival time for overall included patients was 35 days (IQR, 17-66). The 5 most significant prognostic variables were identified to construct the nomogram among all 28 initial variables, including Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), abdominal distention, edema, quality of life (QOL), and duration of pain. In training dataset validation, the AUC at 30 days and 60 days were 0.723 (95% CI, 0.694-0.753) and 0.733 (95% CI, 0.702-0.763), respectively. Similarly, the AUC value was 0.724 (0.673-0.774) at 30 days and 0.725 (0.672-0.778) at 60 days in the testing dataset validation. Further, the calibration curves revealed good agreement between the nomogram predictions and actual observations in both the training and testing dataset. CONCLUSION: This non-lab nomogram may be a useful clinical tool. It needs prospective multicenter validation as well as testing with Chinese clinicians in charge of hospice patients with gastrointestinal cancer to assess acceptability and usability.

Professional oral care in end-of-life patients with advanced cancers in a hospice ward: improvement of oral conditions.

BACKGROUND: In end-of-life patients with advanced cancers, oral examination, oral care, and oral re-examination are crucial. Although oral symptoms are among the major complaints of end-of-life patients, few studies have focused on oral care in these patients. In this study, the association between oral symptoms and oral dryness among end-of-life patients was examined, and improvement of oral conditions after oral care interventions by a professional dentist was quantified. METHODS: This prospective intervention study included 27 terminally ill patients with advanced cancers in a hospice ward. Professional oral care was administered every morning, and the improvement of oral conditions was assessed by comparing oral conditions before and after the intervention. Oral assessment was performed using the Oral Health Assessment Tool (OHAT) and Oral Assessment Guide. Oral dryness was evaluated through Clinical Diagnosis Classification of oral dryness and an oral moisture device. Oral cleanliness was evaluated using a bacterial counter, and tongue smears were collected for Candida examination; furthermore, oral function was recorded. RESULTS: The presence of oral mucositis was closely associated with severe oral dryness (odds ratio [OR] = 14.93; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.95-114.38). The level of oral debris retention was significantly related to the degree of oral dryness (OR = 15.97; 95% CI: 2.06-123.72). The group with higher scores (OHAT > 8), which represent poor oral conditions, showed severe oral dryness (OR = 17.97; 95% CI: 1.45-223.46). Total OHAT scores (median: 7 vs 2) and those of other subgroups (lip, tongue, gums and tissues, saliva, and oral cleanliness showed a significant decrease after the intervention. Furthermore, the occurrence of mucositis (47.1% vs 0%), candidiasis rate (68.8% vs 43.8%), oral dryness self-sensation (63.6% vs 9.1%), and severe oral debris (52.9% vs 11.8%) decreased significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Proper oral care can improve oral health and hygiene, reduce the rate of mucositis, reduce the sensation of oral dryness, increase oral moisture, and reduce the chances of oral infections among end-of-life patients. Daily oral care is necessary and can alleviate oral discomfort, increase food intake, and increase the chances of communication between end-of-life patients and their families.

Variation in Hospice Patient and Admission Characteristics by Referral Location.

BACKGROUND: Little is known regarding differences between patients referred to hospice from different care locations. OBJECTIVE: The objective this study was to describe the associations between hospice referral locations and hospice patient and admission characteristics. RESEARCH DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of hospice administrative data. SUBJECTS: Adult (age older than 18 y) decedents of a national, for-profit, hospice chain across 19 US states who died between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2016. MEASURES: Patients' primary hospice diagnosis, hospice length stay, and hospice care site. We also determined the frequency of opioid prescriptions with and without a bowel regimen on hospice admission. RESULTS: Among 78,647 adult decedents, the mean age was 79.2 (SD=13.5) years, 56.4% were female, and 69.9% were a non-Hispanic White race. Most hospice referrals were from the hospital (51.9%), followed by the community (21.9%), nursing homes (17.4%), and assisted living (8.8%). Cancer (33.6%) was the most prevalent primary hospice diagnosis; however, this varied significantly between referral locations (P<0.001). Similarly, home hospice (32.8%) was the most prevalent site; however, this also varied significantly between referral locations (P<0.001). More hospital-referred patients (55.6%) had a hospice length of stay <7 days compared with patients referred from nursing homes (30.3%), the community (28.9%), or assisted living (18.7%), P<0.001. Hospital-referred patients also had the lowest frequency (58.4%) of coprescribed opioids and bowel regimen on hospice admission compared with other referral locations. CONCLUSION: We observed significant differences in hospice patient and admission characteristics by referral location.

Polypharmacy, Medication Possession, and Deprescribing of Potentially Non-Beneficial Drugs in Hospice Patients.

Patients frequently have comorbidities that when combined with their primary diagnosis qualifies the patient for hospice. Consequently, patients are at risk for polypharmacy due to the number of medications prescribed to treat both the underlying conditions and the related symptoms. Polypharmacy is associated with negative consequences, including increased risk for adverse drug events, drug-drug and drug-disease interactions, reduced functional status and falls, multiple geriatric syndromes, medication nonadherence, and increased mortality. Polypharmacy also increases the complexity of medication management for caregivers and contributes to the cost of prescription drugs for hospices and patients. Deprescribing or removing nonbeneficial or ineffective medications can reduce polypharmacy in hospice. We study medication possession ratios and rates of deprescribing of commonly prescribed but potentially nonbeneficial classes of medication using a large hospice pharmacy database. Prevalence of some classes of potentially inappropriate medications is high. We report possession ratios for 10 frequently prescribed classes, and, because death and prescription termination are competing events, we calculate prescription termination rates using Cumulative Incidence Functions. Median duration of antifungal and antiviral medications is brief (5 and 7 days, respectively), while statins and diabetes medications have slow discontinuance rates (median termination durations of 93 and 197 days). Almost all patients with a proton pump inhibitor prescription have the drug for their entire hospice stay. Data from this study identify those drug classes that are commonly deprescribed slowly, suggesting drug classes and diagnoses that hospices may wish to focus on more closely, as they act to limit polypharmacy and reduce prescription costs.

Trends in place of death in a small developing country: a population-level study using death certificate data.

BACKGROUND: Valuable information for planning future end-of-life care (EOLC) services and care facilities can be gained by studying trends in place of death (POD). Scarce data exist on the POD in small developing countries. This study aims to examine shifts in the POD of all persons dying between 1999 and 2010 in Trinidad and Tobago, to draw conclusions about changes in the distribution of POD over time and the possible implications for EOLC practice and policy. METHODS: A population-level analysis of routinely collected death certificate data of the most recent available fully coded years at the time of the study-1999 to 2010. Observed proportions for the POD of all deaths were standardised according to the age, sex and cause of death distribution in 1999. Trends for a subgroup of persons who died from causes indicative of a palliative care (PC) need were also examined. RESULTS: The proportion of deaths in government hospitals increased from 48.9% to 55.4% and decreased from 38.7% to 29.7% at private homes. There was little variation between observed and standardised rates. The decrease in home deaths was stronger when the PC subcategory was considered, most notably from cancer. CONCLUSION: Internationally, the proportion of deaths at institutions is increasing. A national strategy on palliative and EOLC is needed to facilitate the increasing number of people who seek EOLC at government hospitals in Trinidad and Tobago, including an investigation into the reasons for the trend. Alternatives to accommodate out-of-hospital deaths can be considered.

Sociodemographic and clinical factors for non-hospital deaths among cancer patients: A nationwide population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Factors associated with place of death inform policies with respect to allocating end-of-life care resources and tailoring supportive measures. OBJECTIVE: To determine factors associated with non-hospital deaths among cancer patients. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of cancer decedents, examining factors associated with non-hospital deaths using multinomial logistic regression with hospital deaths as the reference category. SETTING/SUBJECTS: Cancer patients (n = 15254) in Singapore who died during the study period from January 1, 2012 till December 31, 2105 at home, acute hospital, long-term care (LTC) or hospice were included. RESULTS: Increasing age (categories ≥65 years: RRR 1.25-2.61), female (RRR 1.40; 95% CI 1.28-1.52), Malays (RRR 1.67; 95% CI 1.47-1.89), Brain malignancy (RRR 1.92; 95% CI 1.15-3.23), metastatic disease (RRR 1.33-2.01) and home palliative care (RRR 2.11; 95% CI 1.95-2.29) were associated with higher risk of home deaths. Patients with low socioeconomic status were more likely to have hospice or LTC deaths: those living in smaller housing types had higher risk of dying in hospice (1-4 rooms apartment: RRR 1.13-3.17) or LTC (1-5 rooms apartment: RRR 1.36-4.11); and those with Medifund usage had higher risk of dying in LTC (RRR 1.74; 95% CI 1.36-2.21). Patients with haematological malignancies had increased risk of dying in hospital (categories of haematological subtypes: RRR 0.06-0.87). CONCLUSIONS: We found key sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with non-hospital deaths in cancer patients. More can be done to enable patients to die in the community and with dignity rather than in a hospital.

Regional variations in geographic access to inpatient hospices and Place of death: A Population-based study in England, UK.

BACKGROUND: There is much variation in hospice use with respect to geographic factors such as area-based deprivation, location of patient's residence and proximity to services location. However, little is known about how the association between geographic access to inpatient hospice and hospice deaths varies by patients' region of settlement. STUDY AIM: To examine regional differences in the association between geographic access to inpatient hospice and hospice deaths. METHODS: A regional population-based observational study in England, UK. Records of patients aged ≥ 25 years (n = 123088) who died from non-accidental causes in 2014, were extracted from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) death registry. Our cohort comprised of patients who died at home and in inpatient hospice. Decedents were allocated to each of the nine government office regions of England (London, East Midlands, West Midlands, East, Yorkshire and The Humber, South West, South East, North West and North East) through record linkage with their postcode of usual residence. We defined geographic access as a measure of drive times from patients' residential location to the nearest inpatient hospice. A modified Poisson regression estimated the association between geographic access to hospice, comparing hospice deaths (1) versus home deaths (0). We developed nine regional specific models and adjusted for regional differences in patient's clinical & socio-demographic characteristics. The strength of the association was estimated with adjusted Proportional Ratios (aPRs). FINDINGS: The percentage of deaths varied across regions (home: 86.7% in the North East to 73.0% in the South East; hospice: 13.3% in the North East to 27.0% in the South East). We found wide differences in geographic access to inpatient hospices across regions. Median drive times to hospice varied from 4.6 minutes in London to 25.9 minutes in the North East. We found a dose-response association in the East: (aPRs: 0.22-0.78); East Midlands: (aPRs: 0.33-0.63); North East (aPRs: 0.19-0.87); North West (aPRs: 0.69-0.88); South West (aPRs: 0.56-0.89) and West Midlands (aPRs: 0.28-0.92) indicating that decedents who lived further away from hospices locations (≥ 10 minutes) were less likely to die in a hospice. CONCLUSION: The clear dose-response associations in six regions underscore the importance of regional specific initiatives to improve and optimise access to hospices. Commissioners and policymakers need to do more to ensure that home death is not due to limited geographic access to inpatient hospice care.

Response and role of palliative care during the COVID-19 pandemic: A national telephone survey of hospices in Italy.

BACKGROUND: Palliative care is an important component of health care in pandemics, contributing to symptom control, psychological support, and supporting triage and complex decision making. AIM: To examine preparedness for, and impact of, the COVID-19 pandemic on hospices in Italy to inform the response in other countries. DESIGN: Cross-sectional telephone survey, in March 2020. SETTING: Italian hospices, purposively sampled according to COVID-19 regional prevalence categorised as high (>25), medium (15-25) and low prevalence (<15) COVID-19 cases per 100,000 inhabitants. A brief questionnaire was developed to guide the interviews. Analysis was descriptive. RESULTS: Seven high, five medium and four low prevalence hospices provided data. Two high prevalence hospices had experienced COVID-19 cases among both patients and staff. All hospices had implemented policy changes, and several had rapidly implemented changes in practice including transfer of staff from inpatient to community settings, change in admission criteria and daily telephone support for families. Concerns included scarcity of personal protective equipment, a lack of hospice-specific guidance on COVID-19, anxiety about needing to care for children and other relatives, and poor integration of palliative care in the acute planning response. CONCLUSION: The hospice sector is capable of responding flexibly and rapidly to the COVID-19 pandemic. Governments must urgently recognise the essential contribution of hospice and palliative care to the COVID-19 pandemic and ensure these services are integrated into the health care system response. Availability of personal protective equipment and setting-specific guidance is essential. Hospices may also need to be proactive in connecting with the acute pandemic response.

Hospice Utilization in Elderly Patients With Brain Metastases.

BACKGROUND: Brain metastases are associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. Integration of hospice at the end of life offers patients symptom relief and improves quality of life, particularly for elderly patients who are less able to tolerate brain-directed therapy. Population-level investigations of hospice utilization among elderly patients with brain metastases are limited. METHODS: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare database for primary cancer sites that commonly metastasize to the brain, we identified 50 148 patients (aged 66 years and older) diagnosed with brain metastases between 2005 and 2016. We calculated the incidence, timing, and predictors of hospice enrollment using descriptive techniques and multivariable logistic regression. All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: The incidence of hospice enrollment was 71.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 71.0 to 71.9; P < .001), a rate that increased over the study period (P < .001). The odds of enrollment for black (odds ratio [OR] = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.71 to 0.82; P < .001), Hispanic (OR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.72 to 0.87; P < .001), and Asian patients (OR = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.48 to 0.57; P < .001) were substantially lower than white patients; men were less likely to be enrolled in hospice than women (OR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.74 to 0.81; P < .001). Among patients enrolled in hospice, 32.6% (95% CI = 32.1 to 33.1; P < .001) were enrolled less than 7 days prior to death, a rate that was stable over the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Hospice is used for a majority of elderly patients with brain metastases although a considerable percentage of patients die without hospice services. Many patients enroll in hospice late and, concerningly, statistically significant sociodemographic disparities exist in hospice utilization. Further investigations to facilitate targeted interventions addressing such disparities are warranted.

Evaluating for disparities in place of death for head and neck cancer patients in the United States utilizing the CDC WONDER database.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate trends in place of death for patients with head and neck cancers (HNC) in the U.S. from 1999 to 2017 based on the CDC WONDER (Wide-ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research) database. MATERIALS/METHODS: Using patient-level data from 2015 and aggregate data from 1999 to 2017, multivariable logistic regression analyses (MLR) were performed to evaluate for disparities in place of death. RESULTS: We obtained aggregate data for 101,963 people who died of HNC between 1999 and 2017 (25.9% oral cavity, 24.6% oropharynx/pharynx, 0.4% nasopharynx, and 49.1% larynx/hypopharynx). Most were Caucasian (92.7%) and male (87.0%). Deaths at home or hospice increased over the study period (R2 = 0.96, p < 0.05) from 29.2% in 1999 to 61.2% in 2017. On MLR of patient-level data from 2015, those who were single (ref), ages 85+ (OR 0.78; 95% CI: 0.68, 0.90), African American (OR 0.73; 95% CI: 0.65, 0.82), or Asian/Pacific Islanders (OR 0.66; 95% CI: 0.54, 0.81) were less likely to die at home or hospice. On MLR of the aggregate data (1999-2017), those who were female (OR 0.87; 95% CI: 0.83, 0.91) or ages 75-84 (OR 0.79; 95% CI: 0.76, 0.82) were also less likely to die at home or hospice. In both analyses, those who died from larynx/hypopharynx cancers were less likely to die at home or hospice. CONCLUSIONS: HNC-related deaths at home or hospice increased between 1999 and 2017. Those who were single, female, African American, Asian/Pacific Islander, older (ages 75+), or those with larynx/hypopharynx cancers were less likely to die at home or hospice.

Effectiveness of home hospice care: a nationwide prospective observational study.

PURPOSE: Many assert the need for home hospice care. However, limited research has shown its effectiveness. The authors of this study thus evaluated the effectiveness of a home hospice care pilot project regarding (1) early enrollment in hospice care, (2) efficient use of inpatient hospice resources, and (3) enabling terminally ill patients to stay at their preferred place of care. METHODS: The authors conducted a nationwide prospective observational study. Patients were divided into home hospice care users (ever-users, n = 902) and inpatient-only hospice care users (never-users, n = 8210). Information about hospice service utilization was collected from a web-based registry system. Patients were registered if they started to receive the hospice service after providing written informed consent during the pilot project from March 2016-July 2017. RESULTS: Most ever-users preferred to stay at home (84.0%), while never-users preferred hospital admission (66.9%). Most ever-users were enrolled in hospice by home care (78.9%) and used both home and inpatient care (72.4%). The overall duration of hospice care was significantly longer among ever-users than never-users (median 39 vs. 15 days, respectively; mean ± SD 59.6 ± 62.8 vs. 24.8 ± 32.1, respectively; p < .001). Participation in the pilot program improved bed utilization (p = .025) and turnover rate (p < .001) of inpatient hospice service. CONCLUSIONS: Home hospice care enabled early enrollment in hospice services and provided a valid option to patients who wished to stay at home. Policy efforts to facilitate home hospice care are needed.

Role of clinical psychology in UK hospices.

OBJECTIVE: The National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) (2004) guidance recommends a tiered approach to psychological care within cancer care. This includes the provision of Clinical Psychologists to support other professionals to deliver high-quality psychological care at levels 1 and 2 and to provide direct input to patients experiencing high levels of distress at level 4. However, little is known about the role of Clinical Psychology within UK Hospices currently. A survey of Clinical Psychologists working in this area was undertaken to address this gap in knowledge. METHODS: We conducted an anonymous online survey of Clinical Psychologists working in Hospice organisations across the UK. Recruitment was completed via professional networking groups, social media and by contacting UK Hospice organisations. The survey included quantitative and qualitative items about professionals' experience, how their input is organised, their roles and activities and their views on the valuable and challenging aspects of working in this setting. RESULTS: Eighteen Clinical Psychologists responded and there was considerable variance in how their roles were organised. The tasks undertaken by most respondents were direct work with and consultation for hospice patients, and teaching and training staff. However, the findings demonstrated that Clinical Psychologists can undertake a wide range of tasks and draw on a range of therapeutic approaches including Cognitive Behavioural Therapy, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy and Compassion Focused Therapy, in their hospice work. CONCLUSION: Our results provide an overview of the role of Clinical Psychology in UK Hospices and demonstrate the contribution that Psychologists can make to this field.

Nonprescription Medication Use in Hospice Patients.

OBJECTIVE: Patients admitted to hospice are more vulnerable to age-related physiologic changes, polypharmacy, and inappropriate medication use and monitoring. The objective of this study was to characterize the utilization of nonprescription medications in a hospice population. METHODS: This was a retrospective study designed to characterize nonprescription or over-the-counter medication use in hospice patients. Data for this study were provided by Seasons Hospice & Palliative Care, a national hospice organization with licenses to operate in 19 states and collected from January 1 to December 31, 2016. The most frequently utilized nonprescription medications, therapeutic classes, and the frequency of patients with at least 1 claim within a therapeutic class were summarized. RESULTS: The final study population included 62 639 orders representing 15 164 patients. The average age was 79.31 years with a standard deviation of 13.31 years. The average length of stay was 26.80 days with a standard deviation of 44.14 days. The top 5 most common medications were as follows: acetaminophen (25.15%), bisacodyl (21.69%), senna (8.35%), omeprazole (4.51%), and docusate (4.46%). Approximately 13 714 (29.67%) of patients were exposed to analgesics, 13 469 (29.14%) to laxatives, and 3535 (7.65%) to antacids or antigas medications. CONCLUSION: This study highlights numerous opportunities for improvement in the use of nonprescription medications among hospice patients. Reducing the use of nonprescription medications that are ineffective or produce unwanted side effects can contribute to improving the quality of care that patients receive.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Use Near the End of Life Is Associated With Poor Performance Status, Lower Hospice Enrollment, and Dying in the Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors have changed the landscape of cancer care by increasing progression-free and overall survival in some patients with cancer. We evaluated use and variables contributing to immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment near the end of life. METHODS: We studied 157 patients who received immune checkpoint inhibitors and died between January 2015 and December 2018. All patients had a palliative care consult any time between starting an immune checkpoint inhibitor and death. Univariate and multivariate models were used to examine variables related to immune checkpoint inhibitor use near the end of life. RESULTS: Among 157 patients studied, 42 (27%) received a dose of immune checkpoint inhibitor in the last 30 days of life. Those who received treatment in the last 30 days of life had lower hospice enrollment (19 [45%] vs 78 [69%], P = .007) and higher rates of dying in the hospital (23 [56%] vs 33 [29%], P = .002). The percentage of patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) ≥3 at the time of last immune checkpoint inhibitor dose was higher in the group that received immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment in the last 30 days of life (11 [26%] vs 9 [8%], P = .003). Lack of traditional chemotherapy after immune checkpoint inhibitor, ECOG ≥3, and lack of hospice enrollment were independently associated with receiving immune checkpoint inhibitor in the last 30 days of life. CONCLUSION: Immune checkpoint inhibitor use in the last 30 days of life is common and associated with poor performance status, lower hospice enrollment, and dying in the hospital.

Determining the Association Between End-of-Life Care Resources and Patient Outcomes in Pennsylvania ICUs.

OBJECTIVES: As ICUs are increasingly a site of end-of-life care, many have adopted end-of-life care resources. We sought to determine the association of such resources with outcomes of ICU patients. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Pennsylvania ICUs. PATIENTS: Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. INTERVENTIONS: Availability of any of one hospital-based resource (palliative care consultants) or four ICU-based resources (protocol for withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy, triggers for automated palliative care consultation, protocol for family meetings, and palliative care clinicians embedded in ICU rounds). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In mixed-effects regression analyses, admission to a hospital with end-of-life resources was not associated with mortality, length of stay, or treatment intensity (mechanical ventilation, hemodialysis, tracheostomy, gastrostomy, artificial nutrition, or cardiopulmonary resuscitation); however, it was associated with a higher likelihood of discharge to hospice (odds ratio, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.11-2.24), an effect that was driven by ICU-based resources (odds ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.04-1.81) rather than hospital-based resources (odds ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.83-1.71). Instrumental variable analysis using differential distance (defined as the additional travel distance beyond the hospital closest to a patient's home needed to reach a hospital with end-of-life resources) demonstrated that among those for whom differential distance would influence receipt of end-of-life resources, admission to a hospital with such resources was not associated with any outcome. CONCLUSIONS: ICU-based end-of-life care resources do not appear to change mortality but are associated with increased hospice utilization. Given that this finding was not confirmed by the instrumental variable analysis, future studies should attempt to verify this finding, and identify specific resources or processes of care that impact the care of ICU patients at the end of life.

Association between advanced cancer patient-caregiver agreement regarding prognosis and hospice enrollment.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced, incurable cancer who understand their illness is incurable are more likely to prefer hospice care at the end of life compared with patients who believe their illness is curable. To the authors' knowledge, it is unclear whether patient-caregiver agreement regarding perceived prognosis is associated with hospice enrollment. METHODS: The current study examined the prospective relationship between patient-caregiver agreement concerning perceived prognosis and hospice enrollment in the last 30 days of life. Data were collected during a cluster randomized controlled trial examining a communication intervention for oncologists and patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers. At the time of study entry, patients and caregivers (141 dyads) were categorized as endorsing a "good" prognosis if they: 1) reported a >50% chance of surviving ≥2 years; or if they 2) predicted that the patient's quality of life 3 months into the future would be ≥7 on an 11-point scale. RESULTS: Approximately one-fifth of dyads agreed on a poor prognosis whereas approximately one-half disagreed regarding prognosis. In approximately one-third of dyads, patients and caregivers both believed the patient's future quality of life would be good (34%) and that the patient would live for ≥2 years (30%). Patients in these dyads were less likely to enroll in hospice compared with patients in dyads who disagreed and those who agreed on a shorter life expectancy and poor future quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Dyadic understanding of patients' projected life expectancy and future quality of life appears to be predictive of care received at the end of life. Improving rates of hospice enrollment may be best achieved with dyadic interventions.

Hispanic Hospice Utilization: Integrative Review and Meta-analysis.

Hospice is patient-centered end-of-life care. Hispanics are underrepresented among hospice patients (7.1%) relative to the U.S. population (17%). We conducted a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis to understand this underrepresentation further. In palliative care, Hispanic hospice enrollment is comparable to that of non-Hispanic Whites (NHWs) (RR 1.02, 95% CI: 0.93-1.12; z=0.49; p = .627). However, in cases of heart failure (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.37-0.66) and stroke (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.63-0.94), Hispanics are much less likely to use hospice than NHWs. Cancer studies are mixed, but in meta-analysis were significant for lower relative hospice use in Hispanics (RR 0.96, 95% CI: 0.94-0.99; z=3.01; p=.003). It remains unclear whether using census and insurance data in statistical analysis provides valid results since the Hispanic population is younger, healthier, and less likely to be insured. Health equity in hospice may be better represented by hospice quality rather than hospice enrollment rates.