The Adolescent and Young Adult Needs Assessment & Service Bridge (NA-SB): A single-arm feasibility pilot study.

PURPOSE: In this pilot study, we evaluated the feasibility of implementing the Needs Assessment & Service Bridge (NA-SB)- an intervention to address the pervasive unmet needs of adolescents and young adults (AYAs) during cancer treatment. METHODS: We conducted a mixed methods single-arm feasibility pilot study of NA-SB at the North Carolina Basnight Cancer Hospital. Eligible participants were AYAs ages 18-39 in active cancer treatment. After receiving NA-SB, participants completed a postintervention survey assessing their perceptions of NA-SB. We interviewed participating providers to assess their implementation experiences. RESULTS: On average, AYA participants (n = 26) rated NA-SB's feasibility as 4.5/5, its acceptability as 4.5/5, and its appropriateness as 4.4/5. 77% of participants agreed or strongly agreed that their needs were met in the study period. CONCLUSION: This pilot study generated preliminary evidence to establish NA-SB's feasibility as well as proof of concept for the intervention as a viable approach for identifying and addressing AYAs' unmet needs.

Navigating Challenging Conversations About Nonmedical Opioid Use in the Context of Oncology.

Opioids are commonly used in the context of oncology to treat cancer-related pain. In the context of increased awareness of nonmedical use of opioids, including misuse and opioid use disorder among individuals with cancer, oncologists may find themselves having difficult conversations with patients regarding the use of opioids. We offer a review of pertinent literature and a conversation framework for providers to use, as well as key communication strategies for clinicians. Building on the therapeutic alliance between provider and patient, emphasizing the importance of nonabandonment, and using a benefit-to-harm framework, we hope clinicians find they are more able to navigate these challenging but important conversations with patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Providers may find it difficult and uncomfortable to discuss nonmedical use of opioids with patients. To the authors' knowledge, no previous articles discuss ways to communicate about nonmedical use of opioids in the oncology setting. This work borrows from other specialties and offers a communication framework and key communication strategies to help clinications communicate more effectively with patients who may have an opioid use disorder or may be using their prescribed opioids for reasons other than their pain.

Would You Be Surprised If This Patient Died This Year? Advance Care Planning in Substance Use Disorders.

Primary care physicians are increasingly incorporating screening tools for substance use disorders (SUDs) and referral to treatment into their practice. Despite efforts to provide access to treatment, patients with SUDs remain at an increased risk of mortality, both from overdose and from general medical conditions. Advance care planning (ACP) is recommended for patients with chronic, progressive medical conditions such as malignancies or heart failure. Though SUDs are widely acknowledged to be chronic diseases associated with an increased risk of mortality, there has been little discussion on ACP in this population. ACP is a discussion regarding future care, often including selection of a surrogate decision-maker and completion of an advanced directive. ACP has been associated with better quality of end-of-life and care more consistent with patient preferences. Studies in other vulnerable populations have shown that marginalized and high-risk individuals may be less likely to receive ACP. Similarly, patients with SUDs may employ different decision-makers than that defined by law (i.e., friend vs. family member), increasing the importance of discussing patient values and social structure. Physicians should routinely conduct ACP conversations with patients with SUDs, especially those with chronic, progressive medical conditions and/or severe, uncontrolled substance use disorders.

The Inner Lives of Doctors: Physician Emotion in the Care of the Seriously Ill.

Elisabeth Kübler-Ross' seminal 1969 work, On Death and Dying, opened the door to understanding individuals' emotional experiences with serious illness and dying. Patient's emotions, however, are only half the story in the patient-physician relationship. In recent years physicians' emotional reactions have gotten more attention. These sometimes-unacknowledged emotions influence how we approach our work, including life and death decisions. This article reviews some of the main emotions physicians experience when caring for seriously ill and dying patients and the challenges physicians face in regulating their emotions in a professional setting. We also discuss some of the ways that physician emotion may influence medical decision-making and contribute to conflict. Attention to the emotional level of physician experience may promote better care.

Education for the mind and the heart? Changing residents' attitudes about addressing unhealthy alcohol use.

BACKGROUND: Screening and brief intervention counseling for unhealthy alcohol use are among the top 10 recommended clinical preventive services for US adults. Although federally funded training programs in alcohol screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) have focused on increasing physicians' professional readiness to address drinking with their patients, programs typically focus on knowledge and skill acquisition, with less attention to attitudinal change. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of a multicomponent SBIRT training program on changes in internal medical residents' professional readiness for working with patients with unhealthy alcohol use. METHODS: Between 2011 and 2013, first-year internal medicine residents (n = 80) at a large academic medical center participated in a 16-hour SBIRT training program, consisting of two 3-hour didactic sessions, online modules, and a half-day clinical experience, during the Ambulatory Care month of the residency training year. Residents completed a modified Alcohol and Problems Perceptions Questionnaire (AAPPQ) at the beginning and end of the residency year to assess changes in professional readiness to work with adults with unhealthy alcohol use across 6 domains: Role Adequacy, Role Legitimacy, Role Support, Motivation, Task-Specific Self-esteem, and Satisfaction. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to evaluate changes in the 6 AAPPQ subscale scores over time. RESULTS: Residents reported significant increases in Role Adequacy (alcohol-related knowledge/skills; pre: 34 and post: 39.5; P < .0001) and Role Support (professional support; pre: 16 and post: 18; P = .005) scores. No significant differences in the remaining AAPPQ subscales were detected. CONCLUSIONS: Residents in the SBIRT training program indicated improvements in knowledge, skills, and professional role support but not in motivation, task-specific self-esteem, or satisfaction for working with patients with unhealthy alcohol use. Explicit curricular attention to these domains may be required to facilitate SBIRT skills application and sustained practice change.

Knowledge, barriers and facilitators of exercise in dialysis patients: a qualitative study of patients, staff and nephrologists.

BACKGROUND: Despite growing evidence on benefits of increased physical activity in hemodialysis (HD) patients and safety of intra-dialytic exercise, it is not part of standard clinical care, resulting in a missed opportunity to improve clinical outcomes in these patients. To develop a successful exercise program for HD patients, it is critical to understand patients', staff and nephrologists' knowledge, barriers, motivators and preferences for patient exercise. METHODS: In-depth interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of HD patients, staff and nephrologists from 4 dialysis units. The data collection, analysis and interpretation followed Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research guidelines. Using grounded theory, emergent themes were identified, discussed and organized into major themes and subthemes. RESULTS: We interviewed 16 in-center HD patients (mean age 60 years, 50% females, 63% blacks), 14 dialysis staff members (6 nurses, 3 technicians, 2 dietitians, 1 social worker, 2 unit administrators) and 6 nephrologists (50% females, 50% in private practice). Although majority of the participants viewed exercise as beneficial for overall health, most patients failed to recognize potential mental health benefits. Most commonly reported barriers to exercise were dialysis-related fatigue, comorbid health conditions and lack of motivation. Specifically for intra-dialytic exercise, participants expressed concern over safety and type of exercise, impact on staff workload and resistance to changing dialysis routine. One of the most important motivators identified was support from friends, family and health care providers. Specific recommendations for an intra-dialytic exercise program included building a culture of exercise in the dialysis unit, and providing an individualized engaging program that incorporates education and incentives for exercising. CONCLUSION: Patients, staff and nephrologists perceive a number of barriers to exercise, some of which may be modifiable. Participants desired an individualized intra-dialytic exercise program which incorporates education and motivation, and they provided a number of recommendations that should be considered when implementing such a program.

Caring for Patients With Opioid Misuse or Substance Use Disorders in Hospice: A National Survey.

Background: Opioid misuse and substance use disorders (SUDs) including opioid use disorder (OUD) are common and negatively impact quality of life. Hospice clinicians' experiences with these conditions have not been well described. Objectives: We sought to explore hospice clinicians' knowledge, practices, and comfort caring for patients with opioid misuse (e.g., a pattern of unsanctioned opioid use escalation, or concurrent illicit substance use) and SUDs. Design: We recruited hospice clinicians in the United States via national hospice and palliative care organizations to complete an online survey designed by the study authors and pilot tested with an interdisciplinary group of current/former hospice clinicians. Results: One hundred seventy-five clinicians (40% nurses, 40% physicians, 16% nurse practitioners) responded to the survey; most had cared for two or more hospice patients with opioid misuse or SUD in the past month. The majority felt confident identifying opioid misuse (94%) and taking SUD histories (79%). Most (62%) felt it is their role to treat hospice patients for SUD, though 56% lacked comfort in using buprenorphine for OUD treatment. While the majority felt it is their role to treat pain in hospice patients with SUDs (94%) and that hospice can help patients with SUDs (94%), many were not comfortable managing pain in patients taking buprenorphine (45%) or naltrexone (49%) for SUDs. Most felt comfortable managing pain in patients taking methadone for SUD (73%). Conclusions: Opioid misuse and SUD are common in hospice. Though clinicians are comfortable taking relevant histories, they feel less comfortable managing patients' opioid misuse or SUD, or these patients' pain.

Should Urine Drug Screen be Done Universally or Selectively in Palliative Care Patients on Opioids?

Urine drug screen (UDS) is a useful test conducted in patients receiving opioids for chronic pain to aid in validating patient adherence to opioid treatment and to detect any nonmedical opioid use (NMOU). One controversial topic regarding its use in palliative care is whether to conduct the test universally and randomly in all patients who are receiving opioids for chronic pain irrespective of their level of risk for NMOU, or to conduct the test selectively in only those with a high risk for engaging in NMOU behaviors. In this "Controversies in Palliative Care" article, 3 expert clinicians independently answer this question. Specifically, each expert provides a synopsis of the key studies that inform their thought processes, share practical advice on their clinical approach, and highlight the opportunities for future research. They all agreed that UDS has some utility in routine palliative care practice but acknowledged the insufficient existing evidence supporting its efficacy. They also underscored the need to improve clinician proficiency in UDS interpretation to enhance its utility. Two experts endorsed random UDS in all patients receiving opioids regardless of their risk profile while the other expert recommended targeted UDS until there is more clinical evidence to support universal, random testing. Use of more methodologically robust study designs in UDS research, examination of the cost-effectiveness of UDS tests, development of innovative programs to manage NMOU behaviors, and investigation of the impact of improved clinician proficiency in UDS interpretation on clinical outcomes, were important areas of future research that the experts identified.

Opioid-prescribing considerations in patients with cancer and substance misuse or substance use disorder: a scoping review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to describe factors in the existing literature that may inform opioid-prescribing decisions for patients with a past or present history of cancer and past or present substance misuse or substance use disorder. INTRODUCTION: Opioids and opioid-related decisions are critical components of cancer care. Most individuals with cancer will experience pain during cancer care, and over half of patients will receive an opioid prescription. Opioid-prescribing decisions require weighing the benefits and harms. The presence of substance misuse or substance use disorder may elevate the risk of opioid-related harms, but there is a lack of consensus on managing patients at this intersection. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review will consider studies that include adult patients with a past or present history of cancer who also have pain and current or historical substance misuse or substance use disorder. The pain may be cancer-related or non-cancer-related. Studies of patients with all types of cancer will be eligible for inclusion, with the exception of non-melanoma skin cancers. Eligible studies will explore factors that inform opioid-prescribing decisions in this patient population. METHODS: The review will be conducted according to JBI methodology for scoping reviews. Studies written in English since database inception will be included. The databases to be searched include MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), Embase, APA PsycINFO, and Google Scholar. Eligible studies will undergo data extraction by 2 independent reviewers using a data extraction tool created by the authors. A narrative summary will describe study characteristics, population details, and strategies used to determine appropriate pain management in the patient population.

Developing a Comprehensive Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Program: Lessons Learned from 7 Years of Growth and Progress.

Purpose: Every year, nearly 100,000 adolescents and young adults (15-39 years, AYAs) are diagnosed with cancer in the United States and many have unmet physical, psychosocial, and practical needs during and after cancer treatment. In response to demands for improved cancer care delivery for this population, specialized AYA cancer programs have emerged across the country. However, cancer centers face multilevel barriers to developing and implementing AYA cancer programs and would benefit from more robust guidance on how to approach AYA program development. Methods: To contribute to this guidance, we describe the development of an AYA cancer program at the University of North Carolina (UNC) Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center. Results: We summarize the evolution of UNC's AYA Cancer Program since it was established in 2015, offering pragmatic strategies for developing, implementing, and sustaining AYA cancer programs. Conclusion: The development of the UNC AYA Cancer Program since 2015 has generated many lessons learned that we hope may be informative to other cancer centers seeking to build specialized services for AYAs.

Top Ten Tips Palliative Care Clinicians Should Know About Buprenorphine.

Pain management in palliative care (PC) is becoming more complex as patients survive longer with life-limiting illnesses and population-wide trends involving opioid misuse become more common in serious illness. Buprenorphine, a generally safe partial mu-opioid receptor agonist, has been shown to be effective for both pain management and opioid use disorder. It is critical that PC clinicians become comfortable with indications for its use, strategies for initiation while understanding risks and benefits. This article, written by a team of PC and addiction-trained specialists, including physicians, nurse practitioners, social workers, and a pharmacist, offers 10 tips to demystify buprenorphine use in serious illness.

Teaching the teachers: faculty preparedness and evaluation of a retreat in screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment.

Effective clinical faculty are essential for disseminating substance abuse screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT). The authors developed an 8-hour SBIRT training for internal medicine faculty preceptors. Trainers conducted SBIRT lectures and small-group communication practice sessions. The authors assessed participants' (n = 27) knowledge, skills, and attitudes using an enhanced Alcohol and Alcohol Problems Perceptions Questionnaire (AAPPQ). Participants self-assessed their changes in SBIRT competence and comfort. Faculty trainees did not feel competent in SBIRT, particularly in intervention and referral to treatment. AAPPQ subscale scores were highest in Role Legitimacy and Motivation and lowest in Role Adequacy and Satisfaction. After training, faculty members reported greater likelihood of performing and teaching SBIRT. In some topic areas, faculty attending an SBIRT training reported limited knowledge and competence for treating drinkers; however, their interest and motivation for doing so was high. Ongoing faculty and organizational development efforts may help close these gaps.

Serious Illness Communication Skills Training during a Global Pandemic.

Background: Communication skills is a core competency for critical care fellowship training. The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has made it increasingly difficult to teach these skills in graduate medical education. We developed and implemented a novel, hybrid version of the Critical Care Communication (C3) skills with virtual and in-person components for pulmonary and critical care fellows. Objective: To develop and implement a new hybrid virtual/in-person version of the traditional C3 serious illness communication skills course and to compare learner outcomes to prior courses. Methods: We modified the C3 course in 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic by adapting large-group didactic content to an online format that included both virtual asynchronous and virtual live content. Small-group skills training remained in person with trained actors and facilitators. We administered self-assessments to the participants and compared with historical data from the traditional in-person courses beginning in 2012. After the 2020 course, we collected informal feedback from a portion of the learners. Results: Like the traditional in-person version, participants rated the hybrid version highly. Learners reported feeling well prepared or very well prepared over 90% of the time in most communication skills after both versions of the course. Over 90% of participants in both versions of the course rated the specific course components as effective or very effective. Feedback from the learners indicates that they prefer the virtual didactics over traditional in-person didactics. Conclusions: Pulmonary and critical care fellows rated a hybrid version of a communication skills training similarly to the traditional in-person version of the course. We have provided a scaffolding on how to implement such a course. We anticipate some of the virtual components of this training will outlive the current pandemic based on learner feedback.

Adapting Palliative Care Skills to Provide Substance Use Disorder Treatment to Patients With Serious Illness.

BACKGROUND: The majority of Palliative Care (PC) clinicians report recently caring for a person with a Substance Use Disorder (SUD). The impact of an untreated SUD is associated with significant suffering but many PC clinicians report a lack of confidence in managing this population. OBJECTIVE: This paper aims to demonstrate existing PC skills that can be adapted to provide primary SUD treatment. METHODS: A comprehensive literature review was conducted on quality PC domains and core SUD treatment principles. To demonstrate the shared philosophy and skills of PC clinicians and SUD treatment, the National Consensus Project Clinical Practice Guidelines for Quality Palliative Care and resources outlining core Addiction Medicine and Nursing Competencies were used. RESULTS: There is an abundance of overlapping domains in PC and SUD treatment. This paper focuses on the domains of communication, team-based care, quality of life considerations, addressing social determinants of health, and adherence to ethical principles. In each section, the shared domain in PC and SUD treatment is discussed and steps to expand PC clinician's skills are provided. CONCLUSION: PC clinicians may be among the last healthcare touchpoint for persons with SUD, by naming the shared skills required in PC and evidenced-based SUD treatment, we challenge the field to undertake primary SUD treatment as part of its constant pursuit to better serve people living with serious illness.

Barriers to Buprenorphine Prescribing for Opioid Use Disorder in Hospice and Palliative Care.

CONTEXT: Hospice and palliative care (HPC) clinicians increasingly care for patients with concurrent painful serious illness and opioid use disorder (OUD) or opioid misuse; however, only a minority of HPC clinicians have an X-waiver license or actively use it to prescribe buprenorphine as medication treatment for OUD. OBJECTIVES: To understand barriers for HPC clinicians to obtaining an X-waiver and prescribing buprenorphine as medication treatment for OUD. METHODS: We performed content analysis on 100 survey responses from members of the national Buprenorphine Peer Support Network, a group of HPC clinicians interested in buprenorphine, on X-waiver status, barriers to obtaining an X-waiver, and barriers to active prescribing. RESULTS: Of 100 HPC clinicians surveyed, only 26 of 57 HPC clinicians with X-waivers had ever prescribed. Prominent barriers included discomfort managing concurrent pain, buprenorphine, and OUD; concerns about impacts on practice; unsupportive practice culture; insufficient practice support; patient facing challenges; and cumbersome regulatory policies. CONCLUSION: Despite HPC clinicians' interest in buprenorphine prescribing for OUD, several steps are needed to facilitate the practice, including clinician education tailored to pain and to clinical challenges faced by HPC clinicians, mentorship on buprenorphine use, and cultural and practice changes to dismantle systemic stigma towards addiction. We propose evidence-based steps derived from our survey findings that individual clinicians, HPC leaders, and national HPC organizations can take to improve care for patients with painful serious illness and OUD.

Applying VitalTalkTM Techniques to Best Case/Worst Case Training to Increase Scalability and Improve Surgeon Confidence in Shared Decision-making.

OBJECTIVE: Best Case/Worst Case (BC/WC) is a communication tool designed to promote shared decision-making for high-risk procedures near the end of life. This study aimed to increase scalability of a BC/WC training program and measure its impact on surgeon confidence in and perceived importance of the methodology. DESIGN: A prospective cohort pre-post study; December 2018 to January 2019. SETTING: Multi-center tertiary care teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-eight resident surgeons from general surgery and otolaryngology. RESULTS: Learners were 24 to 37 years old with 52% in post graduate year 1 to 2. Although learners encountered high-stakes communication (HSC) frequently (3.6 [0.7] on 5-point Likert scale), most reported no HSC training in medical school (74.5%) or residency (87.5%). BC/WC training was accomplished with an instructor to learner ratio of 1-to-5.3. After training, learner confidence improved on all measured communication skills on a 5-point scale (e.g., exploring patient's values increased from 3.6 [0.8] to 4.1 [0.6], p = <0.0001); average within-person improvement was 0.72 (0.6) points across all skills. Perceived importance improved across all skills (e.g., basing a recommendation on patient's values increased from 4.4 [0.8] to 4.8 [0.5], p = 0.0009); average within-person improvement was 0.46 (0.5) points across all skills. Learners reported this training would likely help them in future interactions (4.4 [0.73] on 5-point scale) and 95.2% recommended it be offered to resident physicians in other residency programs and to attending surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: Formal training in BC/WC increases learners' perception of both the importance of HSC skills and their confidence in exercising those skills in clinical practice. VitalTalkTM methodology permitted scaling training to 5.3 learners per instructor and was highly recommended for other surgeons. Ongoing training, such as this, may support more patient-centered decision-making and care.

"She's Not Ready to Give Up Yet!": When a Family Member Overrides the Patient's Medical Decisions.

Autonomy, which gives individuals the right to make informed decisions about their medical treatment, is a central principle in Western bioethics. However, we often encounter patients for whom a family member seems to dominate medical decision-making, to the extent that clinicians become concerned that the patient is subject to excessive pressure or even coercion. In this article, we describe one such case and how we assess a decision-making process that involves family influence. This entails acknowledging that many individuals weigh their family members' preferences and/or well-being heavily in making medical decisions, and family norms for decision-making differ. A family member who tells their loved one "You can't give up now" is typically not ursurping the patient's liberty to make a different decision. However, there are some family influences which may be autonomy-limiting, including credible threats, or in situations of abuse. Aside from these scenarios, our role is not to alter a couple's long-standing dynamics and decision-making processes. However, for the patient who wants to assert herself, we can set the stage in a family meeting and amplify her voice. We must also attend to the emotional level of family members' statements. "I won't let you give up" might be more a statement of grief rather than a true reflection of their values or intent. Supporting the family member's coping may help to bring together what initially seem to be divergent goals. Exploring these decision-making dynamics is key to providing good palliative care.