Expert consensus-based guidance on approaches to opioid management in individuals with advanced cancer-related pain and nonmedical stimulant use.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians treating cancer-related pain with opioids regularly encounter nonmedical stimulant use (i.e., methamphetamine, cocaine), yet there is little evidence-based management guidance. The aim of the study is to identify expert consensus on opioid management strategies for an individual with advanced cancer and cancer-related pain with nonmedical stimulant use according to prognosis. METHODS: The authors conducted two modified Delphi panels with palliative care and addiction experts. In Panel A, the patient's prognosis was weeks to months and in Panel B the prognosis was months to years. Experts reviewed, rated, and commented on the case using a 9-point Likert scale from 1 (very inappropriate) to 9 (very appropriate) and explained their responses. The authors applied the three-step analytical approach outlined in the RAND/UCLA to determine consensus and level of clinical appropriateness of management strategies. To better conceptualize the quantitative results, they thematically analyzed and coded participant comments. RESULTS: Consensus was achieved for all management strategies. The 120 Experts were mostly women (47 [62%]), White (94 [78%]), and physicians (115 [96%]). For a patient with cancer-related and nonmedical stimulant use, regardless of prognosis, it was deemed appropriate to continue opioids, increase monitoring, and avoid opioid tapering. Buprenorphine/naloxone transition was inappropriate for a patient with a short prognosis and of uncertain appropriateness for a patient with a longer prognosis. CONCLUSION: Study findings provide urgently needed consensus-based guidance for clinicians managing cancer-related pain in the context of stimulant use and highlight a critical need to develop management strategies to address stimulant use disorder in people with cancer. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Among palliative care and addiction experts, regardless of prognosis, it was deemed appropriate to continue opioids, increase monitoring, and avoid opioid tapering in the context of cancer-related pain and nonmedical stimulant use. Buprenorphine/naloxone transition as a harm reduction measure was inappropriate for a patient with a short prognosis and of uncertain appropriateness for a patient with a longer prognosis.

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.

Early integration of palliative care services with standard oncology care for patients with advanced cancer.

Scientific advances in novel cancer therapeutics have led to remarkable changes in oncology practice and longer lives for patients diagnosed with incurable malignancies. However, the myriad options for treatment have established a culture of cancer care that has not been matched with a similar availability of efficacious supportive care interventions aimed at relieving debilitating symptoms due to progressive disease and treatment side effects. Accumulating data show that the introduction of palliative care services at the time of diagnosis of advanced cancer leads to meaningful improvement in the experiences of patients and family caregivers by emphasizing symptom management, quality of life, and treatment planning. In this review article, the rationale and evidence base for this model of early palliative care services integrated into standard oncology care are presented. In addition, the implications and limitations of the existing data to 1) elucidate the mechanisms by which early palliative care benefits patients and families; 2) guide the dissemination and application of this model in outpatient settings; and 3) inform health care policy regarding the delivery of high-quality, cost-effective, and comprehensive cancer care are discussed.

Drivers of care costs and quality in the last 3 months of life among older people receiving palliative care: A multinational mortality follow-back survey across England, Ireland and the United States.

BACKGROUND: Care costs rise towards the end of life. International comparison of service use, costs and care experiences can inform quality and improve access. AIM: The aim of this study was to compare health and social care costs, quality and their drivers in the last 3 months of life for older adults across countries. Null hypothesis: no difference between countries. DESIGN: Mortality follow-back survey. Costs were calculated from carers' reported service use and unit costs. SETTING: Palliative care services in England (London), Ireland (Dublin) and the United States (New York, San Francisco). PARTICIPANTS: Informal carers of decedents who had received palliative care participated in the study. RESULTS: A total of 767 questionnaires were returned: 245 in England, 282 in Ireland and 240 in the United States. Mean care costs per person with cancer/non-cancer were US$37,250/US$37,376 (the United States), US$29,065/US$29,411 (Ireland), US$15,347/US$16,631 (England) and differed significantly (F = 25.79/14.27, p < 0.000). Cost distributions differed and were most homogeneous in England. In all countries, hospital care accounted for > 80% of total care costs; community care 6%-16%, palliative care 1%-15%; 10% of decedents used ~30% of total care costs. Being a high-cost user was associated with older age (>80 years), facing financial difficulties and poor experiences of home care, but not with having cancer or multimorbidity. Palliative care services consistently had the highest satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Poverty and poor home care drove high costs, suggesting that improving community palliative care may improve care value, especially as palliative care expenditure was low. Major diagnostic variables were not cost drivers. Care costs in the United States were high and highly variable, suggesting that high-cost low-value care may be prevalent.

Palliative care for respiratory disease: An education model of care.

That palliative care improves quality of life for seriously ill patients and their families is well known - but how can healthcare providers ensure that the palliative needs of all patients are being assessed and addressed? A growing number of curricula in core palliative care practices have been developed to ensure that clinicians from all specialties and disciplines have the necessary training to manage pain and symptoms and discuss care goals with patients and families. Through broad-based training in core palliative care skills, combined with referral to specialty palliative care for high-need patients, providers can improve quality of life for their patients with respiratory disease.

Cost analysis of a prospective multi-site cohort study of palliative care consultation teams for adults with advanced cancer: Where do cost-savings come from?

BACKGROUND: Studies report cost-savings from hospital-based palliative care consultation teams compared to usual care only, but drivers of observed differences are unclear. AIM: To analyse cost-differences associated with palliative care consultation teams using two research questions: (Q1) What is the association between early palliative care consultation team intervention, and intensity of services and length of stay, compared to usual care only? (Q2) What is the association between early palliative care consultation team intervention and day-to-day hospital costs, compared to a later intervention? DESIGN: Prospective multi-site cohort study (2007-2011). Patients who received a consultation were placed in the intervention group, those who did not in the comparison group. Intervention group was stratified by timing, and groups were matched using propensity scores. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Adults admitted to three US hospitals with advanced cancer. Principle analytic sample contains 863 patients ( nUC = 637; nPC EARLY = 177; nPC LATE = 49) discharged alive. RESULTS: Cost-savings from early palliative care accrue due to both reduced length of stay and reduced intensity of treatment, with an estimated 63% of savings associated with shorter length of stay. A reduction in day-to-day costs is observable in the days immediately following initial consult but does not persist indefinitely. A comparison of early and late palliative care consultation team cost-effects shows negligible difference once the intervention is administered. CONCLUSION: Reduced length of stay is the biggest driver of cost-saving from early consultation for patients with advanced cancer. Patient- and family-centred discussions on goals of care and transition planning initiated by palliative care consultation teams may be at least as important in driving cost-savings as the reduction of unnecessary tests and pharmaceuticals identified by previous studies.

Education, implementation, and policy barriers to greater integration of palliative care: A literature review.

BACKGROUND: Early integration of palliative care into the management of patients with serious disease has the potential to both improve quality of life of patients and families and reduce healthcare costs. Despite these benefits, significant barriers exist in the United States to the early integration of palliative care in the disease trajectory of individuals with serious illness. AIM: To provide an overview of the barriers to more widespread palliative care integration in the United States. DESIGN AND DATA SOURCES: A literature review using PubMed from 2005 to March 2015 augmented by primary data collected from 405 hospitals included in the Center to Advance Palliative Care's National Palliative Care Registry for years 2012 and 2013. We use the World Health Organization's Public Health Strategy for Palliative Care as a framework for analyzing barriers to palliative care integration. RESULTS: We identified key barriers to palliative care integration across three World Health Organization domains: (1) education domain: lack of adequate education/training and perception of palliative care as end-of-life care; (2) implementation domain: inadequate size of palliative medicine-trained workforce, challenge of identifying patients appropriate for palliative care referral, and need for culture change across settings; (3) policy domain: fragmented healthcare system, need for greater funding for research, lack of adequate reimbursement for palliative care, and regulatory barriers. CONCLUSION: We describe the key policy and educational opportunities in the United States to address and potentially overcome the barriers to greater integration of palliative care into the healthcare of Americans with serious illness.

Palliative Care Improves Quality of Care, Lowers Costs.

Palliative care has become America's fastest growing medical specialty. ere are now more than 6,500 physicians and 13,500 nurses certified in palliative care, and palliative care teams available in more than 80% of American hospitals with more than 50 beds.

Perceptions of Palliative Care Program Viability During the Pandemic: Qualitative Results From a National Survey.

Background: Palliative care programs have played a significant role during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the financial impact of the pandemic and operational challenges for palliative care programs have raised concerns for their future viability. Objectives: To explore palliative care program leaders' perceptions of the future viability of their programs in the context of the pandemic and inform future educational and program development. Methods: Surveys were sent to 1430 specialist palliative care program leaders, identified through the Center to Advance Palliative Care's contact lists, via email in May 2020 and January 2021. Leaders were asked why they were or were not concerned about the viability of their palliative care programs. Qualitative content analysis was applied to determine themes. Results: We received 440 responses. Most programs served hospital settings and were geographically located across all US regions. We identified four themes: 1) The importance of being valued by organizational leadership and peers, 2) The importance of adequate and supported palliative care staff, 3) The pandemic validated and accelerated the need for palliative care, and 4) The pandemic perpetuated organizational financial concerns. Conclusion: Findings provide insights about palliative care program viability from the perspective of program leaders during a global pandemic. Technical assistance to support palliative care teams and their relationships with stakeholders, methods to measure the impact of peer support, efforts to educate administrators about the value of palliative care, and efforts to reduce burnout are needed to sustain palliative care programs into the future.

The Experience of Black Patients With Serious Illness in the United States: A Scoping Review.

CONTEXT: Black patients experience health disparities in access and quality of care. OBJECTIVE: To identify and characterize the literature on the experiences of Black patients with serious illness across multiple domains - physical, spiritual, emotional, cultural, and healthcare utilization. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of US literature from the last ten years using the PRISMA-ScR framework. PubMed was used to conduct a comprehensive search, followed by recursive citation searches in Scopus. Two reviewers screened the resulting citations to determine eligibility for inclusion and extracted data, including study methods and sample populations. The included articles were categorized by topic and then further organized using the Social-Ecological Model. RESULTS: From an initial review of 433 articles, a final sample of 160 were included in the scoping review. The majority of articles used quantitative research methods and were published in the last four years. Articles were categorized into 20 topics, ranging from Access to Hospice and Utilization (42 articles) to Community Outreach and Services (three articles). Three-quarters (76.3%) of the included studies provided evidence that racial disparities exist in serious illness care, while less than one-quarter examined causes of disparities. The most common Model levels were the Health Care System (102 articles) and Individual (71 articles) levels. CONCLUSION: More articles focused on establishing evidence of disparities between Black and White patients than on understanding their root causes. Further investigation is warranted to understand how factors at the patient, provider, health system, and society levels interact to remediate disparities.

Advancing Alzheimer's disease diagnosis, treatment, and care: recommendations from the Ware Invitational Summit.

To address the pending public health crisis due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) and related neurodegenerative disorders, the Marian S. Ware Alzheimer Program at the University of Pennsylvania held a meeting entitled "State of the Science Conference on the Advancement of Alzheimer's Diagnosis, Treatment and Care," on June 21-22, 2012. The meeting comprised four workgroups focusing on Biomarkers; Clinical Care and Health Services Research; Drug Development; and Health Economics, Policy, and Ethics. The workgroups shared, discussed, and compiled an integrated set of priorities, recommendations, and action plans, which are presented in this article.

Increased access to palliative care and hospice services: opportunities to improve value in health care.

CONTEXT: A small proportion of patients with serious illness or multiple chronic conditions account for the majority of health care spending. Despite the high cost, evidence demonstrates that these patients receive health care of inadequate quality, characterized by fragmentation, overuse, medical errors, and poor quality of life. METHODS: This article examines data demonstrating the impact of the U.S. health care system on clinical care outcomes and costs for the sickest and most vulnerable patients. It also defines palliative care and hospice, synthesizes studies of the outcomes of palliative care and hospice services, reviews variables predicting access to palliative care and hospice services, and identifies those policy priorities necessary to strengthen access to high-quality palliative care. FINDINGS: Palliative care and hospice services improve patient-centered outcomes such as pain, depression, and other symptoms; patient and family satisfaction; and the receipt of care in the place that the patient chooses. Some data suggest that, compared with the usual care, palliative care prolongs life. By helping patients get the care they need to avoid unnecessary emergency department and hospital stays and shifting the locus of care to the home or community, palliative care and hospice reduce health care spending for America's sickest and most costly patient populations. CONCLUSIONS: Policies focused on enhancing the palliative care workforce, investing in the field's science base, and increasing the availability of services in U.S. hospitals and nursing homes are needed to ensure equitable access to optimal care for seriously ill patients and those with multiple chronic conditions.

The National Palliative Care Research Center and the Center to Advance Palliative Care: a partnership to improve care for persons with serious illness and their families.

The elimination of suffering and the cure of disease are the fundamental goals of medicine. While medical advances have transformed previously fatal conditions such as cancer and heart disease into illnesses that people can live with for many years, they have not been accompanied by corresponding improvements in the quality of life for these patients and their families. Living with a serious illness should not mean living in pain or experiencing symptoms like shortness of breath, nausea, or fatigue. Yet, multiple studies over the past decade suggest that medical care for patients with advanced illness is characterized by inadequately treated physical distress; fragmented care systems; poor communication between doctors, patients, and families; and enormous strains on family caregiver and support systems. Palliative care is interdisciplinary care focused on relief of pain and other symptoms and support for best possible quality of life for patients with serious illness, and their families. It is appropriate at the point of diagnosis of a serious illness. It goes beyond hospice care to offer patients and their families treatments focused on improving quality of life while they are receiving life-prolonging and curative treatments. Palliative care programs have been shown to reduce symptoms, improve doctor-patient-family communication and satisfaction with care, as well as enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of hospital services. In the last 5 years alone the number of palliative care programs has more than doubled. This growth is in response to the increasing numbers and needs of Americans living with serious, complex and chronic illnesses, and the realities of the care responsibilities faced by their families. In order to ensure that all persons with serious illness and their families receive the quality of care they deserve, palliative care must become an integral part of the U.S. healthcare landscape. Specifically, persons facing serious illness and their families must know to request palliative care, medical professionals must have the knowledge and skills to provide palliative care, and hospitals and other healthcare institutions must be equipped to deliver and support palliative care services. The Center to Advance Palliative Care (CAPC) and the National Palliative Care Research Center (NPCRC) are accomplishing this three-part mission by working in partnership to: 1) Develop research to serve as the knowledge base for quality clinical care and the foundation on which to build palliative care programs and systems; 2) Disseminate this knowledge to patients, families, professionals, and institutions throughout the United States and ensure that it is integrated within mainstream healthcare; and 3) Influence and collaborate with policy makers , regulatory bodies, and federal funding agencies to ensure that the healthcare infrastructure supports the continued growth and development of palliative care.