Differences in US Regional Healthcare Allocation Guidelines During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Hospitals faced unprecedented scarcity of resources without parallel in modern times during the COVID-19 pandemic. This scarcity led healthcare systems and states to develop or modify scarce resource allocation guidelines that could be implemented during "crisis standards of care" (CSC). CSC describes a significant change in healthcare operations and the level of care provided during a public health emergency. OBJECTIVE: Our study provides a comprehensive examination of the latest CSC guidelines in the western region of the USA, where Alaska and Idaho declared CSC, focusing on ethical issues and health disparities. DESIGN: Mixed-methods survey study of physicians and/or ethicists and review of healthcare system and state allocation guidelines. PARTICIPANTS: Ten physicians and/or ethicists who participated in scarce resource allocation guideline development from seven healthcare systems or three state-appointed committees from the western region of the USA including Alaska, California, Idaho, Oregon, and California. RESULTS: All sites surveyed developed allocation guidelines, but only four (40%) were operationalized either statewide or for specific scarce resources. Most guidelines included comorbidities (70%), and half included adjustments for socioeconomic disadvantage (50%), while only one included specific priority groups (10%). Allocation tiebreakers included the life cycle principle and random number generators. Six guidelines evolved over time, removing restrictions such as age, severity of illness, and comorbidities. Additional palliative care (20%) and ethics (50%) resources were planned by some guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Allocation guidelines are essential to support clinicians during public health emergencies; however, significant deficits and differences in guidelines were identified that may perpetuate structural inequities and racism. While a universal triage protocol that is equally accepted by all communities is unlikely, the lack of regional agreement on standards with justification and transparency has the potential to erode public trust and perpetuate inequity.

Palliative Care Early in the Care Continuum among Patients with Serious Respiratory Illness: An Official ATS/AAHPM/HPNA/SWHPN Policy Statement.

Background: Patients with serious respiratory illness and their caregivers suffer considerable burdens, and palliative care is a fundamental right for anyone who needs it. However, the overwhelming majority of patients do not receive timely palliative care before the end of life, despite robust evidence for improved outcomes. Goals: This policy statement by the American Thoracic Society (ATS) and partnering societies advocates for improved integration of high-quality palliative care early in the care continuum for patients with serious respiratory illness and their caregivers and provides clinicians and policymakers with a framework to accomplish this. Methods: An international and interprofessional expert committee, including patients and caregivers, achieved consensus across a diverse working group representing pulmonary-critical care, palliative care, bioethics, health law and policy, geriatrics, nursing, physiotherapy, social work, pharmacy, patient advocacy, psychology, and sociology. Results: The committee developed fundamental values, principles, and policy recommendations for integrating palliative care in serious respiratory illness care across seven domains: 1) delivery models, 2) comprehensive symptom assessment and management, 3) advance care planning and goals of care discussions, 4) caregiver support, 5) health disparities, 6) mass casualty events and emergency preparedness, and 7) research priorities. The recommendations encourage timely integration of palliative care, promote innovative primary and secondary or specialist palliative care delivery models, and advocate for research and policy initiatives to improve the availability and quality of palliative care for patients and their caregivers. Conclusions: This multisociety policy statement establishes a framework for early palliative care in serious respiratory illness and provides guidance for pulmonary-critical care clinicians and policymakers for its proactive integration.

Association Between Financial Distress with Patient and Caregiver Outcomes in Home-Based Palliative Care: A Secondary Analysis of a Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Serious illness often causes financial hardship for patients and families. Home-based palliative care (HBPC) may partly address this. OBJECTIVE: Describe the prevalence and characteristics of patients and family caregivers with high financial distress at HBPC admission and examine the relationship between financial distress and patient and caregiver outcomes. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: Data for this cohort study were drawn from a pragmatic comparative-effectiveness trial testing two models of HBPC in Kaiser Permanente. We included 779 patients and 438 caregivers from January 2019 to January 2020. MEASUREMENTS: Financial distress at admission to HBPC was measured using a global question (0-10-point scale: none=0; mild=1-5; moderate/severe=6+). Patient- (Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale, distress thermometer, PROMIS-10) and caregiver (Preparedness for Caregiving, Zarit-12 Burden, PROMIS-10)-reported outcomes were measured at baseline and 1 month. Hospital utilization was captured using electronic medical records and claims. Mixed-effects adjusted models assessed survey measures and a proportional hazard competing risk model assessed hospital utilization. RESULTS: Half of the patients reported some level of financial distress with younger patients more likely to have moderate/severe financial distress. Patients with moderate/severe financial distress at HBPC admission reported worse symptoms, general distress, and quality of life (QoL), and caregivers reported worse preparedness, burden, and QoL (all, p<.001). Compared to patients with no financial distress, moderate/severe financial distress patients had more social work contacts, improved symptom burden at 1 month (ESAS total score: -4.39; 95% CI: -7.61, -1.17; p<.01), and no increase in hospital-based utilization (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.11; 95% CI: 0.87-1.40; p=.41); their caregivers had improved PROMIS-10 mental scores (+2.68; 95% CI: 0.20, 5.16; p=.03). No other group differences were evident in the caregiver preparedness, burden, and physical QoL change scores. CONCLUSION: These findings highlight the importance and need for routine assessments of financial distress and for provision of social supports required to help families receiving palliative care services.

Continuity of Care Assessment Within a Vertically Integrated Care Management Organization Before and After COPD-Related Exacerbations.

BACKGROUND: There is currently little research describing patient experience and continuity of care immediately prior, during, and following an acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). This analysis examined clinical characteristics, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)­related medication patterns and outpatient visits before and after an AECOPD. METHODS: This retrospective analysis used electronic health records, medical claims, and pharmacy dispensing data for patients within the Kaiser Permanente Northwest Health System. Patients with ≥1 AECOPD between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2017 were identified. The most recent AECOPD was considered the index date. An AECOPD was defined as an inpatient hospitalization with a primary diagnosis of COPD, or respiratory failure with a secondary diagnosis of COPD, or an outpatient visit with a primary diagnosis of COPD and dispensing of respiratory-related antibiotics and/or oral corticosteroids ±5 days of the visit. Eligible patients were: ≥40 years old; ≥2 encounters within 12 months of each other or ≥1 hospitalization with primary or secondary COPD diagnosis, chronic bronchitis, or emphysema prior to index; and continuously enrolled ±90 days relative to index. COPD-related inhaled maintenance medication, rescue inhalers, oral corticosteroid use, and ambulatory visits were assessed 90-days pre- and post-index. RESULTS: There were 2829 patients included (mean [standard deviation] age: 69.0 [10.5] years) who had an AECOPD (7% severe; 93% moderate). The percentage of patients on inhaled maintenance therapy increased from 60.6% pre-AECOPD to 68.8% post-AECOPD and increased from 60.0% to 87.4% among patients who experienced a severe AECOPD. COPD-related ambulatory visits increased more than four-fold for primary care and more than doubled for pulmonologist visits in the post-AECOPD period. CONCLUSION: The low proportion of patients observed with changes to controller and rescue medication (particularly following a moderate AECOPD), yet higher utilization of COPD-related ambulatory visits before and after an AECOPD suggests that there is opportunity to improve pharmacotherapy management.

Outcome preferences of older people with multiple chronic conditions and hypertension: a cross-sectional survey using best-worst scaling.

BACKGROUND: Older people with hypertension and multiple chronic conditions (MCC) receive complex treatments and face challenging trade-offs. Patients' preferences for different health outcomes can impact multiple treatment decisions. Since evidence about outcome preferences is especially scarce among people with MCC our aim was to elicit preferences of people with MCC for outcomes related to hypertension, and to determine how these outcomes should be weighed when benefits and harms are assessed for patient-centered clinical practice guidelines and health economic assessments. METHODS: We sent a best-worst scaling preference survey to a random sample identified from a primary care network of Kaiser Permanente (Colorado, USA). The sample included individuals age 60 or greater with hypertension and at least two other chronic conditions. We assessed average ranking of patient-important outcomes using conditional logit regression (stroke, heart attack, heart failure, dialysis, cognitive impairment, chronic kidney disease, acute kidney injury, fainting, injurious falls, low blood pressure with dizziness, treatment burden) and studied variation across individuals. RESULTS: Of 450 invited participants, 217 (48%) completed the survey, and we excluded 10 respondents who had more than two missing choices, resulting in a final sample of 207 respondents. Participants ranked stroke as the most worrisome outcome and treatment burden as the least worrisome outcome (conditional logit parameters: 3.19 (standard error 0.09) for stroke, 0 for treatment burden). None of the outcomes were always chosen as the most or least worrisome by more than 25% of respondents, indicating that all outcomes were somewhat worrisome to respondents. Predefined subgroup analyses according to age, self-reported life-expectancy, degree of comorbidity, number of medications and antihypertensive treatment did not reveal meaningful differences. CONCLUSIONS: Although some outcomes were more worrisome to patients than others, our results indicate that none of the outcomes should be disregarded for clinical practice guidelines and health economic assessments.

Balance of benefits and harms of different blood pressure targets in people with multiple chronic conditions: a quantitative benefit-harm assessment.

OBJECTIVE: Recent studies suggest that a systolic blood pressure (SBP) target of 120 mm Hg is appropriate for people with hypertension, but this is debated particularly in people with multiple chronic conditions (MCC). We aimed to quantitatively determine whether benefits of a lower SBP target justify increased risks of harm in people with MCC, considering patient-valued outcomes and their relative importance. DESIGN: Highly stratified quantitative benefit-harm assessment based on various input data identified as the most valid and applicable from a systematic review of evidence and based on weights from a patient preference survey. SETTING: Outpatient care. PARTICIPANTS: Hypertensive patients, grouped by age, gender, prior history of stroke, chronic heart failure, chronic kidney disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus. INTERVENTIONS: SBP target of 120 versus 140 mm Hg for patients without history of stroke. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Probability that the benefits of a SBP target of 120 mm Hg outweigh the harms compared with 140 mm Hg over 5 years (primary) with thresholds >0.6 (120 mm Hg better), <0.4 (140 mm Hg better) and 0.4 to 0.6 (unclear), number of prevented clinical events (secondary), calculated with the Gail/National Cancer Institute approach. RESULTS: Considering individual patient preferences had a substantial impact on the benefit-harm balance. With average preferences, 120 mm Hg was the better target compared with 140 mm Hg for many subgroups of patients without prior stroke, especially in patients over 75. For women below 65 with chronic kidney disease and without diabetes and prior stroke, 140 mm Hg was better. The analyses did not include mild adverse effects, and apply only to patients who tolerate antihypertensive treatment. CONCLUSIONS: For most patients, a lower SBP target was beneficial, but this depended also on individual preferences, implying individual decision-making is important. Our modelling allows for individualised treatment targets based on patient preferences, age, gender and co-morbidities.

Protocol for a Noninferiority Comparative Effectiveness Trial of Home-Based Palliative Care (HomePal).

Introduction: As health care systems strive to meet the growing needs of seriously ill patients with high symptom burden and functional limitations, they need evidence about how best to deliver home-based palliative care (HBPC). We compare a standard HBPC model that includes routine home visits by nurses and prescribing clinicians with a tech-supported model that aims to promote timely interprofessional team coordination using video consultation with the prescribing clinician while the nurse is in the patient's home. We hypothesize that tech-supported HBPC will be no worse compared with standard HBPC. Methods: This study is a pragmatic, cluster randomized noninferiority trial conducted across 14 Kaiser Permanente sites in Southern California and the Pacific Northwest. Registered nurses (n = 102) were randomized to the two models so that approximately half of the participating patient-caregiver dyads will be in each study arm. Adult English or Spanish-speaking patients (estimate 10,000) with any serious illness and a survival prognosis of 1-2 years and their caregivers (estimate 4800) are being recruited to the HomePal study over ∼2.5 years. The primary patient outcomes are symptom improvement at one month and days spent at home. The primary caregiver outcome is perception of preparedness for caregiving. Study Implementation-Challenges and Contributions: During implementation we had to balance the rigors of conducting a clinical trial with pragmatic realities to ensure responsiveness to culture, structures, workforce, workflows of existing programs across multiple sites, and emerging policy and regulatory changes. We built close partnerships with stakeholders across multiple representative groups to define the comparators, prioritize and refine measures and study conduct, and optimize rigor in our analytical approaches. We have also incorporated extensive fidelity monitoring, mixed-method implementation evaluations, and early planning for dissemination to anticipate and address challenges longitudinally. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT#03694431.

End-of-Life Care in Patients Exposed to Home-Based Palliative Care vs Hospice Only.

OBJECTIVES: The current evidence base regarding the effectiveness of home-based palliative care (HomePal) on outcomes of importance to multiple stakeholders remains limited. The purpose of this study was to compare end-of-life care in decedents who received HomePal with two cohorts that either received hospice only (HO) or did not receive HomePal or hospice (No HomePal-HO). DESIGN: Retrospective cohorts from an ongoing study of care transition from hospital to home. Data were collected from 2011 to 2016. SETTING: Kaiser Permanente Southern California. PARTICIPANTS: Decedents 65 and older who received HomePal (n = 7177) after a hospitalization and two comparison cohorts (HO only = 25 102; No HomePal-HO = 22 472). MEASUREMENTS: Utilization data were extracted from administrative, clinical, and claims databases, and death data were obtained from state and national indices. Days at home was calculated as days not spent in the hospital or in a skilled nursing facility (SNF). RESULTS: Patients who received HomePal were enrolled for a median of 43 days and had comparable length of stay on hospice as patients who enrolled only in hospice (median days = 13 vs 12). Deaths at home were comparable between HomePal and HO (59% vs 60%) and were higher compared with No HomePal-HO (16%). For patients who survived at least 6 months after HomePal admission (n = 2289), the mean number of days at home in the last 6 months of life was 163 ± 30 vs 161 ± 30 (HO) vs 149 ± 40 (No HomePal-HO). Similar trends were also noted for the last 30 days of life, 25 ± 8 (HomePal, n = 5516), 24 ± 8 (HO), and 18 ± 11 (No HomePal-HO); HomePal patients had a significantly lower risk of hospitalizations (relative risk [RR] = .58-.87) and SNF stays (RR = .32-.77) compared with both HO and No HomePal-HO patients. CONCLUSION: Earlier comprehensive palliative care in patients' home in place of or preceding hospice is associated with fewer hospitalizations and SNF stays and more time at home in the final 6 months of life. J Am Geriatr Soc, 2019.

Reducing Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Hospital Readmissions. An Official American Thoracic Society Workshop Report.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the third leading cause of hospital readmissions in the United States. The quality of care delivered to patients with COPD is known to be lacking across the care continuum, and may contribute to high rates of readmission. As part of the response to these issues, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid instituted a penalty for 30-day readmissions as part of their Hospital Readmission Reduction Program in October 2014. At the time the penalty was instated, there was little published evidence on effective hospital-based programs to reduce readmissions after acute exacerbations of COPD. Even now, several years later, few published programs exist, and we continue to lack consistent approaches that lead to improved readmission rates. In addition, there was concern that the penalty would widen health disparities. Despite the dearth of published evidence to reduce readmissions beyond available COPD guidelines, many hospitals across the United States began to develop and implement programs, based on little evidence, due to the financial penalty. We, therefore, assembled a diverse group of clinicians, researchers, payers, and program leaders from across the country to present and discuss approaches that had the greatest potential for success. We drew on expertise from ongoing readmission reduction programs, implementation methodologies, and stakeholder perspectives to develop this Workshop Report on current best practices and models for addressing COPD hospital readmissions.

Engaging Stakeholders to Inform Clinical Practice Guidelines That Address Multiple Chronic Conditions.

BACKGROUND: Having more than one chronic condition is common and is associated with greater health care utilization, higher medication burden and complexity of treatment. However, clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) do not routinely address the balance between harms and benefits of treatments for people with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs). OBJECTIVE: To partner with the Kaiser Permanente Integrated Cardiovascular Health (ICVH) program to engage multiple stakeholders in a mixed-methods approach in order to: 1) identify two high-priority clinical questions related to MCCs, and 2) understand patients' and family caregivers' perceptions of meaningful outcomes to inform benefit/harm assessments for these two high-priority questions. These clinical questions and outcomes will be used to inform CPG recommendations for people with MCCs. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: The ICVH program provided 130 topics rank-ordered by the potential for finding evidence that would change clinical recommendations regarding the topic. We used a modified Delphi method to identify and reword topics into questions relevant to people with MCCs. We used two sets of focus groups (n = 27) to elicit patient and caregiver perspectives on two important research questions and relevant patient-important outcomes on benefit/harm balance for people with MCCs. KEY RESULTS: Co-investigators, patients and caregivers identified "optimal blood pressure goals" and "diabetes medication management" as important clinical topics for CPGs related to people with MCCs. Stakeholders identified a list of relevant outcomes to be addressed in future CPG development including 1) physical function and energy, 2) emotional health and well-being, 3) avoidance of treatment burden, side effects and risks, 4) interaction with providers and health care system, and 5) prevention of adverse long-term health outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Through the application of a mixed-methods process, we identified the questions regarding optimal blood pressure goals and diabetes medication management, along with related patient-centered outcomes, to inform novel evidence syntheses for those with MCCs. This study provides the lessons learned and a generalizable process for CPG developers to engage patient and caregivers in priority-setting for the translation of evidence into future CPGs. Ultimately, engaging patient and stakeholders around MCCs could improve the relevance of CPGs for the care of people with MCCs.

Palliative and end-of-life educational practices in US pulmonary and critical care training programs.

PURPOSE: To describe educational features in palliative and end-of-life care (PEOLC) in pulmonary/critical care fellowships and identify the features associated with perceptions of trainee competence in PEOLC. METHODS: A survey of educational features in 102 training programs and the perceived skill and comfort level of trainees in 6 PEOLC domains: communication, symptom control, ethical/legal, community/institutional resources, specific syndromes, and ventilator withdrawal. We evaluated associations between perceived trainee competence/comfort in PEOLC and training program features, using regression analyses. RESULTS: Fifty-five percent of program directors (PDs) reported faculty with training in PEOLC; 30% had a written PEOLC curriculum. Neither feature was associated with trainee competence/comfort. Program directors and trainees rated bedside PEOLC teaching highly. Only 20% offered PEOLC rotations; most trainees judged these valuable. Most PDs and trainees reported that didactic teaching was insufficient in communication, although sufficient teaching of this was associated with perceived trainee competence in communication. Perceived trainee competence in managing institutional resources was rated poorly. Program directors reporting significant barriers to PEOLC education also judged trainees less competent in PEOLC. Time constraint was the greatest barrier. CONCLUSION: This survey of PEOLC education in US pulmonary/critical care fellowships identified associations between certain program features and perceived trainee skill in PEOLC. These results generate hypotheses for further study.

Hospitalist attitudes toward the assessment and management of dyspnea in patients with acute cardiopulmonary diseases.

BACKGROUND: Dyspnea is a common symptom in patients hospitalized with acute cardiopulmonary diseases. Routine assessment of dyspnea severity is recommended by clinical guidelines based on the evidence that patients are not treated consistently for dyspnea relief. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate attitudes and beliefs of hospitalists regarding the assessment and management of dyspnea. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTINGS: Nine hospitals in the United States. MEASUREMENTS: Survey questions assessed the following domains regarding dyspnea: importance in clinical care, potential benefits and challenges of implementing a standardized assessment, current approaches to assessment, and how awareness of severity affects management. A 5-point Likert scale was used to assess the respondent's level of agreement; strongly agree and agree were combined into a single category. RESULTS: Of the 255 hospitalists invited to participate, 69.8% completed the survey; 77.0% agreed that dyspnea relief is an important goal when treating patients with cardiopulmonary conditions. Approximately 90% of respondents stated that awareness of dyspnea severity influences their decision to intensify treatment, to pursue additional diagnostic testing, and the timing of discharge. Of the respondents, 61.0% agreed that standardized assessment of dyspnea should be part of the vital signs, and 64.6% agreed that awareness of dyspnea severity influences their decision to prescribe opioids. Hospitalists who appreciated the importance of dyspnea in clinical practice were more likely to support the implementation of a standardized scale. CONCLUSIONS: Most hospitalists believe that routine assessment of dyspnea severity would enhance their clinical decision making and patient care. Measurement and documentation of dyspnea severity may represent an opportunity to improve dyspnea management.

Prevention of acute exacerbations of COPD: American College of Chest Physicians and Canadian Thoracic Society Guideline.

BACKGROUND: COPD is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States as well as throughout the rest of the world. An exacerbation of COPD (periodic escalations of symptoms of cough, dyspnea, and sputum production) is a major contributor to worsening lung function, impairment in quality of life, need for urgent care or hospitalization, and cost of care in COPD. Research conducted over the past decade has contributed much to our current understanding of the pathogenesis and treatment of COPD. Additionally, an evolving literature has accumulated about the prevention of acute exacerbations. METHODS: In recognition of the importance of preventing exacerbations in patients with COPD, the American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST) and Canadian Thoracic Society (CTS) joint evidence-based guideline (AECOPD Guideline) was developed to provide a practical, clinically useful document to describe the current state of knowledge regarding the prevention of acute exacerbations according to major categories of prevention therapies. Three key clinical questions developed using the PICO (population, intervention, comparator, and outcome) format addressed the prevention of acute exacerbations of COPD: nonpharmacologic therapies, inhaled therapies, and oral therapies. We used recognized document evaluation tools to assess and choose the most appropriate studies and to extract meaningful data and grade the level of evidence to support the recommendations in each PICO question in a balanced and unbiased fashion. RESULTS: The AECOPD Guideline is unique not only for its topic, the prevention of acute exacerbations of COPD, but also for the first-in-kind partnership between two of the largest thoracic societies in North America. The CHEST Guidelines Oversight Committee in partnership with the CTS COPD Clinical Assembly launched this project with the objective that a systematic review and critical evaluation of the published literature by clinical experts and researchers in the field of COPD would lead to a series of recommendations to assist clinicians in their management of the patient with COPD. CONCLUSIONS: This guideline is unique because it provides an up-to-date, rigorous, evidence-based analysis of current randomized controlled trial data regarding the prevention of COPD exacerbations.

An official American Thoracic Society/American College of Chest Physicians policy statement: the Choosing Wisely top five list in adult pulmonary medicine.

The American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation's Choosing Wisely campaign aims to curb health-care costs and improve patient care by soliciting lists from medical societies of the top five tests or treatments in their specialty that are used too frequently and inappropriately. The American Thoracic Society (ATS) and American College of Chest Physicians created a joint task force, which produced a top five list for adult pulmonary medicine. Our top five recommendations, which were approved by the executive committees of the ATS and American College of Chest Physicians and published by Choosing Wisely in October 2013, are as follows: (1) Do not perform CT scan surveillance for evaluation of indeterminate pulmonary nodules at more frequent intervals or for a longer period of time than recommended by established guidelines; (2) do not routinely offer pharmacologic treatment with advanced vasoactive agents approved only for the management of pulmonary arterial hypertension to patients with pulmonary hypertension resulting from left heart disease or hypoxemic lung diseases (groups II or III pulmonary hypertension); (3) for patients recently discharged on supplemental home oxygen following hospitalization for an acute illness, do not renew the prescription without assessing the patient for ongoing hypoxemia; (4) do not perform chest CT angiography to evaluate for possible pulmonary embolism in patients with a low clinical probability and negative results of a highly sensitive D-dimer assay; (5) do not perform CT scan screening for lung cancer among patients at low risk for lung cancer. We hope pulmonologists will use these recommendations to stimulate frank discussions with patients about when these tests and treatments are indicated--and when they are not.

An official American Thoracic Society workshop report: assessment and palliative management of dyspnea crisis.

In 2009, the American Thoracic Society (ATS) funded an assembly project, Palliative Management of Dyspnea Crisis, to focus on identification, management, and optimal resource utilization for effective palliation of acute episodes of dyspnea. We conducted a comprehensive search of the medical literature and evaluated available evidence from systematic evidence-based reviews (SEBRs) using a modified AMSTAR approach and then summarized the palliative management knowledge base for participants to use in discourse at a 2009 ATS workshop. We used an informal consensus process to develop a working definition of this novel entity and established an Ad Hoc Committee on Palliative Management of Dyspnea Crisis to further develop an official ATS document on the topic. The Ad Hoc Committee members defined dyspnea crisis as "sustained and severe resting breathing discomfort that occurs in patients with advanced, often life-limiting illness and overwhelms the patient and caregivers' ability to achieve symptom relief." Dyspnea crisis can occur suddenly and is characteristically without a reversible etiology. The workshop participants focused on dyspnea crisis management for patients in whom the goals of care are focused on palliation and for whom endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation are not consistent with articulated preferences. However, approaches to dyspnea crisis may also be appropriate for patients electing life-sustaining treatment. The Ad Hoc Committee developed a Workshop Report concerning assessment of dyspnea crisis; ethical and professional considerations; efficient utilization, communication, and care coordination; clinical management of dyspnea crisis; development of patient education and provider aid products; and enhancing implementation with audit and quality improvement.

Medication use, emergency hospital care utilization, and quality-of-life outcome disparities by race/ethnicity among adults with asthma.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the association of race/ethnicity with medication use, emergency hospital care (EHC) utilization, and quality-of-life outcomes in a population with persistent asthma and to determine if factors related to severity of illness, treatment characteristics, and demographic, socioeconomic, and smoking status explain differences in study outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. METHODS: We examined survey and administrative data for 974 adults with persistent asthma enrolled in a group-model health maintenance organization. Patients with persistent asthma were identified in 1999 using Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set inclusion criteria. In 2000, the same patients were surveyed regarding quality of life using the Mini Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire. In 2001, the use of controller medications, the ratio of controller medications to rescue medications, and EHC utilization were identified by electronic medical record. Multiple logistic regression and linear regression analyses were used to evaluate the independent association of race/ethnicity with study outcomes after adjusting for severity of illness, treatment characteristics, and demographic, socioeconomic, and smoking status. RESULTS: Compared with whites, African Americans (standardized ß coefficient, -0.12) and Native Americans/Aleutians/Eskimos (standardized ß coefficient, -0.14) had lower Mini Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire scores (P <.05 for both). African Americans were significantly (P <.05) more likely to report EHC utilization (odds ratio, 5.2; 95% confidence interval, 2.6-10.3). CONCLUSIONS: Disparities existed in 2 outcome measures, Mini Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire scores and EHC utilization. A concerning finding is that African Americans were at least 5 times more likely to report higher EHC utilization, even after adjusting for factors such as income and education.

Focus group findings about the influence of culture on communication preferences in end-of-life care.

BACKGROUND: Little guidance is available for health care providers who try to communicate with patients and their families in a culturally sensitive way about end-of-life care. OBJECTIVE: To explore the content and structure of end-of-life discussions that would optimize decision making by conducting focus groups with two diverse groups of patients that vary in ethnicity and socioeconomic status. DESIGN: Six focus groups were conducted; 3 included non-Hispanic white patients recruited from a University hospital (non-Hispanic white groups) and 3 included African-American patients recruited from a municipal hospital (African-American groups). A hypothetical scenario of a dying relative was used to explore preferences for the content and structure of communication. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-six non-Hispanic white participants and 34 African-American participants. APPROACH: Content analysis of focus group transcripts. RESULTS: Non-Hispanic white participants were more exclusive when recommending family participants in end-of-life discussions while African-American participants preferred to include more family, friends and spiritual leaders. Requested content varied as non-Hispanic white participants desired more information about medical options and cost implications while African-American participants requested spiritually focused information. Underlying values also differed as non-Hispanic white participants expressed more concern with quality of life while African-American participants tended to value the protection of life at all costs. CONCLUSIONS: The groups differed broadly in their preferences for both the content and structure of end-of-life discussions and on the values that influence those preferences. Further research is necessary to help practitioners engage in culturally sensitive end-of-life discussions with patients and their families by considering varying preferences for the goals of end-of-life care communication.

End-of-life care in the critically ill geriatric population.

As the geriatric population in the United States increases and better management of chronic diseases improves survival, more elderly will become critically ill and potentially require treatment in an intensive care unit (ICU). Dan Callahan has written, "... we will live longer lives, be better sustained by medical care, in return for which our deaths in old age are more likely to be drawn out and wild." Although no health care provider hopes for a drawn out and wild death for elderly patients, many geriatric persons will succumb to disease and die after having chosen and received ICU care. Recent data suggest that, on average, 11% of Medicare recipients spend more that 7 days in the ICU within 6 months before death.