Risk stratification and outreach to hematology/oncology patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: Cancer patients have many medical and psychosocial needs, which may increase during the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to (1) risk-stratify hematology/oncology patients using general medicine and cancer-specific methods to identify those at high risk for acute care utilization, (2) measure the correlation between two risk stratification methods, and (3) perform a telephone-based needs assessment with intervention for high-risk patients. METHODS: Patients were risk-stratified using a general medical health composite score (HCS) and a cancer-specific risk (CSR) stratification based on disease and treatment characteristics. The correlation between HCS and CSR was measured using Spearman's correlation. A multi-disciplinary team developed a focused needs assessment script with recommended interventions for patients categorized as high-risk by either method. The number of patient needs identified and referrals for services made in the first month of outreach are reported. RESULTS: A total of 1697 patients were risk-stratified, with 17% high-risk using HCS and 22% high-risk using CSR. Correlation between HCS and CSR was modest (ρ = 0.41). During the first month of the pilot, 286 patients were called for outreach with 245 contacted (86%). Commonly identified needs were financial difficulties (17%), uncontrolled symptoms (15%), and interest in advance care planning (13%), resulting in referral for supportive services for 33% of patients. CONCLUSION: There is a high burden of unmet medical and psychosocial needs in hematology/oncology patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. A telephone-based outreach program results in the identification of and intervention for these needs; however, additional cancer-specific risk models are needed to improve targeting to high-risk patients.

How well do documented goals-of-care discussions for patients with stage IV cancer reflect communication best practices?

BACKGROUND: Written clinical communication regarding patients' disease understanding and values may facilitate goal-concordant care, yet little is known about the quality of electronic health record (EHR) documentation. We sought to (1) describe frequency of communication best practices in EHR-documented goals-of-care discussions, and (2) assess whether templated notes improve quality of documentation. METHODS: Researchers pulled text of EHR-documented goals-of-care discussions for hospitalized patients with Stage IV cancer from admission to 60-days follow-up. Text was included when in a single encounter the clinician addressed: (a) prognosis and/or illness understanding; and (b) goals and/or treatment options. Researchers qualitatively coded text based on guidelines for communication best practices, and noted if an EHR template was used. RESULTS: Forty-two percent (206/492) of patients had EHR-documented goals-of-care discussions. Text frequently described communication of cancer progression (89%), though rarely included prognosis (22%). Text often included patients' goals and values (83%), and at least on specific treatment decision (82%). Communication about treatments was included for 98% of patients; common examples included cancer treatment (62%), hospice (62%), resuscitation (51%), or intensive care (38%). Clinicians documented making recommendations for 40% of patients. Text addressing patient emotional and spiritual concerns was uncommon (15%). Compared to free text, use of a template was associated with increased documentation of goals and values (80% vs. 61%, p < 0.01), but not other best practices. CONCLUSION: Insights from the study can be used to guide future training and research to study and improve the quality of documentation about goal of care, and its impact on goal-concordant care.

Expanding and Enhancing Advance Care Planning to Promote Goal-Concordant Care.

Advance care planning (ACP) is associated with benefits for seriously ill patients, caregivers, and clinicians. As ACP usage expands, there should be greater emphasis on supporting an ongoing communication process among patients, families, and clinicians, as well as removing barriers for advance directive document completion and retrieval.

Incorporating palliative care principles to improve patient care and quality of life in urologic oncology.

Palliative care - specialized healthcare focused on improving quality of life for patients with serious illnesses - can help urologists to care for patients with unmet symptom, coping and communication needs. Society guidelines from the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommend incorporating palliative care into standard oncological care, based on multiple randomized trials demonstrating that it significantly improves physical well-being, patient satisfaction and goal concordant care. Misconceptions regarding the objective and ideal timing of palliative care are common; a key concept is that palliative care and treatments seeking to cure or prolong life are not mutually exclusive. Urologists are well positioned to champion the integration of palliative care into surgical urologic oncology and should be aware of palliative care guidelines, indications for palliative care use and how the field of urologic oncology can adopt best practices.

Evaluation of a Training Toolkit to Improve Clinicians' Skills for Dementia Advance Care Planning.

Background: Primary care clinicians care for most persons with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRDs), yet lack dementia-specific skills in advance care planning (ACP). Objectives: To develop and evaluate a training toolkit for primary care clinicians to improve ACP communication for people with ADRD and their families. Design: Clinical practice outcomes assessment and pre-post-training evaluation. Intervention training toolkit addressed ACP skills by dementia stage: (1) advance directives in early dementia, (2) decision-making capacity in moderate dementia, (3) Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) in late-stage dementia, and (4) hospice and hospitalization in advanced dementia. Setting/Subjects: Nonhospitalized clinical care sites, 51 clinicians in North Carolina, USA. Measurements: Data collection utilized structured chart abstractions and pre- and post-training surveys. Results: Of 51 participants trained, 33 had encounters with patients with ADRD in study period. Most participants were women (n = 42), white (n = 37), and physicians (n = 31). Participants increased documentation of surrogates (22.7% vs. 35.5%, p = 0.03), decision-making capacity (13.5% vs.23.2%, p = 0.04), and POLST completion (9.2% vs. 18.8%, p = 0.03). Training increased ACP documentation (6.4% vs. 14.5%, p = 0.031) and goals of care (GOC) decision-making discussions (17.0% vs. 31.9%, p = 0.005). In pre-post-comparisons, participant confidence increased in determining capacity, exploring dementia prognosis, GOC, eliciting surrogates, and leading family meetings (all p < 0.001). Most participants strongly agreed that the training addressed skills used in practice (n = 34), contained clear language (n = 40), took an appropriate amount of time (n = 32), and was designed effectively (n = 35). Conclusion: This video-based training resource increased the use of dementia-specific ACP communication skills and clinician confidence.

Pre-Post Evaluation of Collaborative Oncology Palliative Care for Patients With Stage IV Cancer.

CONTEXT: The Collaborative Care Model improves care processes and outcomes but has never been tested for palliative care. OBJECTIVES: To develop and evaluate a model of collaborative oncology palliative care for Stage IV cancer. METHODS: We conducted a pre-post evaluation of Collaborative Oncology Palliative Care (CO-Pal), enrolling patients with Stage IV lung, breast or genitourinary cancers and acute illness hospitalization. CO-Pal has 4 components: 1) oncologist communication skills training; 2) patient tracking; 3) palliative care needs assessment; and 4) care coordination stratified by high vs. low palliative care need. Health record reviews from hospital admission through 60 days provided data on outcomes - goals-of-care discussions (primary outcome), advance care planning, symptom treatment, specialty palliative care and hospice use, and hospital transfers. RESULTS: We enrolled 256 patients (n = 114 pre and n = 142 post-intervention); 60-day mortality was 32%. Comparing patients pre vs post-intervention, CO-Pal did not increase overall goals-of-care discussions, but did increase advance care planning (48% vs 63%, P = 0.021) and hospice use (19% vs 31%, P = 0.034). CO-Pal did not impact symptom treatment, overall treatment plans, or 60-day hospital transfers. During the intervention phase, high-need vs low-need patients had more goals-of-care discussions (60% vs. 15%, P < 0.001) and more use of specialty palliative care (64% vs 22%, P < 0.001) and hospice (44% vs 16%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Collaborative oncology palliative care is efficient and feasible. While it did not increase overall goals-of-care discussions, it was effective to increase overall advance care planning and hospice use for patients with Stage IV cancer.

Beyond autonomy: diversifying end-of-life decision-making approaches to serve patients and families.

Efforts to improve end-of-life decision-making quality have emphasized the principle of individual autonomy to better ensure that patients receive care consistent with their preferences. This principle has primarily been defined through court decisions during the past 3 decades as a patient's right to refuse medical technologies and avoid life-prolonging treatments. However, autonomy as traditionally defined only serves a small segment of dying patients. Patients might not value autonomy or consider autonomy important but define it differently than decision-making self-determination. Some patients also think in terms of their care goals rather than individual treatment preferences. Patients' functional and cognitive abilities, age, racial and ethnic backgrounds, and desire to avoid burdening loved ones may influence attitudes and definitions regarding autonomy. To improve end-of-life decision-making for an increasingly multicultural and aging population, the following priorities should be set: (1) Increase the flexibility of advance care planning and decision-making strategies used with capable patients to encompass diverse perceptions of autonomy; and (2) Improve communication between physicians and patients' families when patients lack decision-making capacity to facilitate decision-making and address families' emotional burdens. The goal of these priorities is to promote understanding of patients' and families' decision-making preferences and goals and to minimize decision-making burdens on families.

Factors associated with nursing assistant quality-of-life ratings for residents with dementia in long-term care facilities.

PURPOSE: We identify resident, nursing assistant, and facility factors associated with nursing assistant quality-of-life ratings for residents with dementia in long-term care. DESIGN AND METHODS: We used a cross-sectional survey of 143 nursing assistants providing care to 335 residents in 38 residential care/assisted living (RC/AL) facilities and nursing homes in four states. We assessed resident quality of life by using the Quality of Life-Alzheimer's Disease Scale (QOL-AD). RESULTS: Scores on the quality-of-life scale were most strongly associated with resident clinical conditions, including severity of cognitive and functional impairments, depression, and behavioral symptoms of dementia. There was also an independent positive association between nursing assistants' ratings of resident quality of life and their own attitudes regarding dementia-person-centered care as well as training. However, the results of hierarchical linear modeling suggest that some sources of nursing assistant variability in quality-of-life ratings remain unidentified. IMPLICATIONS: Quality-of-life ratings by nursing assistants may be influenced by their attitudes about dementia and their confidence in addressing residents' fundamental care needs.

Opportunities and challenges to improving end-of-life care for seriously ill elderly patients: a qualitative study of generalist physicians.

BACKGROUND: End-of-life care quality deficiencies have in part been linked to inadequate physician skill in the technical and communication domains of palliative care. Yet few studies have examined physicians' perspectives regarding their experiences caring for patients approaching the end of life. OBJECTIVE: To understand generalist physicians' perspectives regarding their care of seriously ill elderly patients in order to identify challenges to improving end-of-life communication and decision-making. DESIGN: Qualitative study using in-depth ethnographic interviews. SETTING: Puget Sound region of Washington State. PARTICIPANTS: Thirteen community-based generalist physicians who routinely care for elderly patients and represent a range of practice styles and experiences. RESULTS: The physicians described a "revolving door syndrome" in which elderly patients are repeatedly hospitalized with chronic illness exacerbations. Three themes influenced physicians' interactions with "revolving door" patients: (1) physicians' use of decision-making heuristics, characterized as "internal gauges," to promote care consistent with their own values; (2) families' "unreasonable expectations" that patients would return to their previous health after treatment of an acute illness; and (3) families' reluctance to accept end-of-life decision-making responsibility. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that physician values and physician-family interactions impact decision-making for chronically ill elderly patients. The influence of physicians' internal gauges on end-of-life care can facilitate or hinder use of palliative care as well as decision-making consistent with patients' preferences. Disparate physician and family expectations regarding their division of decision-making responsibility and patients' care outcomes may also affect decision-making. The use of communication strategies that promote alignment of these expectations may improve decision-making quality for incapacitated elderly patients.

The quest for nursing home quality: learning history's lessons.

Nursing homes are arguably the most criticized sector of the US health care system. In fact, the nursing home industry's entire history has been marked by cycles of public clamor for improvement and ineffective governmental responses. Over the past century, multiple attempts to improve the quality of nursing home care have had limited success. This article reviews these initiatives from the era of the poorhouse to the most recent reform law, implemented during the last decade. An analysis suggests that the historical reliance on government regulation has not ensured nursing home quality. Future efforts should address the most glaring weaknesses of nursing home regulation, including the lack of standardization of the survey and enforcement processes. In addition, new strategies are needed beyond a reformed inspection system. This article demonstrates that while the exact path to nursing home quality is somewhat uncertain, retracing history's steps will not lead nursing homes in the desired direction.