European Society of Intensive Care Medicine guidelines on end of life and palliative care in the intensive care unit.

The European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) has developed evidence-based recommendations and expert opinions about end-of-life (EoL) and palliative care for critically ill adults to optimize patient-centered care, improving outcomes of relatives, and supporting intensive care unit (ICU) staff in delivering compassionate and effective EoL and palliative care. An international multi-disciplinary panel of clinical experts, a methodologist, and representatives of patients and families examined key domains, including variability across countries, decision-making, palliative-care integration, communication, family-centered care, and conflict management. Eight evidence-based recommendations (6 of low level of evidence and 2 of high level of evidence) and 19 expert opinions were presented. EoL legislation and the importance of respecting the autonomy and preferences of patients were given close attention. Differences in EoL care depending on country income and healthcare provision were considered. Structured EoL decision-making strategies are recommended to improve outcomes of patients and relatives, as well as staff satisfaction and mental health. Early integration of palliative care and the use of standardized tools for symptom assessment are suggested for patients at high risk of dying. Communication training for ICU staff and printed communication aids for families are advocated to improve outcomes and satisfaction. Methods for enhancing family-centeredness of care include structured family conferences and culturally sensitive interventions. Conflict-management protocols and strategies to prevent burnout among healthcare professionals are also considered. The work done to develop these guidelines highlights many areas requiring further research.

End-of-Life Care Among Patients With Kidney Failure on Maintenance Dialysis: A Retrospective Population-Based Study.

Background: Nephrologists routinely provide end-of-life care for patients with kidney failure (KF) on maintenance dialysis. Involvement of primary care and palliative care physicians may enhance this experience. Objective: The objective was to describe outpatient care patterns in the last year of life and the end-of-life acute care utilization for patients with KF on maintenance dialysis. Design: Retrospective cohort study using population-level health administrative data. Setting & Participants: Outpatient and inpatient care during the last year of life among patients who died between 2017 and 2019, receiving maintenance dialysis in Ontario, Canada. Measurements: The primary exposure is patterns of physician specialties providing outpatient care in the last year of life. Outcomes include outpatient encounters in the last year of life, acute care visitation in the last month of life, and place of death. Methods: We reported the count and percentage of categorical outcomes and the median (interquartile range) for numeric outcomes. We produced time series plots of the mean monthly percentage of encounters to different specialties stratified by physician specialty patterns. We evaluated differences in outcomes by physician specialty patterns using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Pearson's chi-square tests (P < .05, two-tailed). Results: Among 6866 patients, the median age at death was 73, 36.1% were female, and 87.8% resided in urban regions. Three patterns emerged: a primary care, nephrology, and palliative care triad (25.5%); a primary care and nephrology dyad (59.3%); and a non-primary care pattern (15.2%). Palliative care involvement is concentrated near death. Of all, 81.4% spent at least 1 day in hospital or emergency department in the last month, but those with primary care, palliative care, and nephrology involvement had the fewest acute care deaths (65.8%). Limitations: Outpatient care patterns were defined using physician billing codes, potentially missing care from other providers. Conclusions: Nephrology and primary care predominantly manage outpatient care in the last year of life for patients with KF on maintenance dialysis, with consistent acute care use across care patterns except for the place of death. Future research should explore associations between patterns of care and end-of-life outcomes to identify the most optimal model of care for patients with KF on maintenance dialysis.

Contexte: Il est courant pour les néphrologues de prodiguer des soins de fin de vie aux patients souffrant d'insuffisance rénale (IR) sous dialyse d'entretien. Cette expérience pourrait être enrichie par la participation des médecins des unités de soins primaires et de soins palliatifs. Objectif: Cette étude visait à décrire les modèles de soins ambulatoires prodigués au cours de la dernière année de vie et l'utilisation des soins aigus en fin de vie chez les patients atteints d'IR sous dialyse d'entretien. Conception: Étude de cohorte populationnelle rétrospective réalisée à partir des données administratives du système de santé. Cadre et sujets de l'étude: Les soins ambulatoires et hospitaliers au cours de la dernière année de vie chez les patients décédés sous dialyse d'entretien entre 2017 et 2019 en Ontario (Canada). Mesures: La principale mesure est le profil des spécialités médicales qui fournissent des soins ambulatoires dans la dernière année de vie. Les données recueillies comprennent les consultations externes au cours de la dernière année de vie, les visites en soins aigus au cours du dernier mois de vie et le lieu du décès. Méthodologie: Nous avons rapporté le nombre et le pourcentage de résultats catégoriels, ainsi que la médiane (écart interquartile) des résultats numériques. Nous avons produit des graphiques chronologiques du pourcentage mensuel moyen de consultations avec différentes spécialités, stratifiées selon les spécialités médicales. Nous avons évalué les différences dans les résultats selon les profils de spécialités médicales en utilisant les tests ANOVA et Chi-Square de Pearson (P <,05; bilatéral). Résultats: Des 6 866 patients inclus (âge médian au décès: 73 ans), 36,1% étaient des femmes et 87,8% vivaient en région urbaine. Trois modèles sont apparus: une triade soins primaires, néphrologie et soins palliatifs (25,5%); une dyade soins primaires et néphrologie (59,3%); et un modèle de soins non primaires (15,2%). La participation des soins palliatifs est concentrée autour du moment du décès. Une grande majorité des patients (81,4%) avait passé au moins une journée à l'hôpital ou aux urgences au cours du dernier mois, mais les personnes qui avaient bénéficié d'une triade de soins (primaires, néphrologie et soins palliatifs) présentaient une moins grande proportion de décès en soins aigus (65,8%). Limites: Les modèles de soins ambulatoires ont été définis à l'aide des codes de facturation des médecins, ce qui pourrait avoir exclu les soins dispensés par d'autres prestataires. Conclusion: Les soins ambulatoires au cours de la dernière année de vie des patients atteints d'IR sous dialyse d'entretien sont principalement prodigués par la néphrologie et les soins primaires, avec une utilisation constante des soins aigus dans tous les modèles de soins, sauf pour le lieu du décès. Les futures recherches devraient explorer les liens entre les modèles de soins et les résultats en fin de vie afin d'identifier le modèle de soins le plus optimal pour les patients atteints d'IR sous dialyse d'entretien.

Corrigendum: Measuring the Use of End-of-Life Symptom Relief Medications in Long-Term Care Homes-a Qualitative Study.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.5770/cgj.27.712.].

Enablers and Barriers for End-of-Life Symptom Management Medications in Long-Term Care Homes: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVES: Long-term care (LTC) homes provide personal and medical care 24/7 to individuals unable to live at home due to illness or disability and are often the final place of care and death for their residents. Therefore, LTC homes are tasked with providing quality end-of-life care, often requiring injectable symptom management medications to relieve distressing symptoms (eg, pain). In this study, we aimed to understand the enablers and barriers to prescribing and administering end-of-life symptom management medications in LTC homes. DESIGN: Qualitative study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: From February 2021 to December 2022, we conducted virtual semi-structured interviews with health care providers (physicians and nurses) who worked in Ontario LTC homes and family caregivers of residents who died in LTC. METHODS: We analyzed interview transcripts using thematic analysis. RESULTS: We identified 4 themes related to factors that may impact the prescribing and administering of medications for end-of-life symptom management: (1) identifying the end-of-life period and symptoms, (2) communication among health care providers and between health care providers and family caregivers, (3) health care provider competency with end-of-life medications, and (4) resources for LTC staff to support medication prescribing and administrating. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: In LTC, there are distinct challenges in the prescribing and administrating of end-of-life symptom management medications. Our findings can be used to inform interventions aimed at improving end-of-life care for LTC residents. However, these interventions require buy-in and investment from the provincial government and the LTC sector.

Continuous palliative sedation until death: a qualitative study of palliative care clinicians' experiences.

BACKGROUND: The practice of continuous palliative sedation until death is the subject of much medical and ethical debate, which is reflected in the inconsistency that persists in the literature regarding the definition and indications of palliative sedation. AIM: This study aims to gain a better understanding of palliative care clinicians' experiences with continuous palliative sedation. DESIGN: We conducted a qualitative study based on focus group discussions. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: We conducted six focus groups with a total of 28 palliative care clinicians (i.e., 15 nurses, 12 physicians, and 1 end-of-life doula) from diverse care settings across Canada, where assisted dying has recently been legalized. RESULTS: An interpretative phenomenological analysis was used to consolidate the data into six key themes: responding to suffering; grappling with uncertainty; adapting care to ensure ongoing quality; grounding clinical practice in ethics; combining medical expertise, relational tact, and reflexivity; and offering an alternative to assisted death. CONCLUSIONS: Interaction with the patient's family, uncertainty about the patient's prognosis, the concurrent practice of assisted dying, and the treatment of existential suffering influence the quality of sedation and indicate a lack of clear palliative care guidelines. Nevertheless, clinicians exhibit a reflective and adaptive capacity that can facilitate good practice.

What are the views of Quebec and Ontario citizens on the tiebreaker criteria for prioritizing access to adult critical care in the extreme context of a COVID-19 pandemic?

BACKGROUND: The prioritization protocols for accessing adult critical care in the extreme pandemic context contain tiebreaker criteria to facilitate decision-making in the allocation of resources between patients with a similar survival prognosis. Besides being controversial, little is known about the public acceptability of these tiebreakers. In order to better understand the public opinion, Quebec and Ontario's protocols were presented to the public in a democratic deliberation during the summer of 2022. OBJECTIVES: (1) To explore the perspectives of Quebec and Ontario citizens regarding tiebreakers, identifying the most acceptable ones and their underlying values. (2) To analyze these results considering other public consultations held during the pandemic on these criteria. METHODS: This was an exploratory qualitative study. The design involved an online democratic deliberation that took place over two days, simultaneously in Quebec and Ontario. Public participants were selected from a community sample which excluded healthcare workers. Participants were first presented the essential components of prioritization protocols and their related issues (training session day 1). They subsequently deliberated on the acceptability of these criteria (deliberation session day 2). The deliberation was then subject to thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 47 participants from the provinces of Quebec (n = 20) and Ontario (n = 27) took part in the online deliberation. A diverse audience participated excluding members of the healthcare workforce. Four themes were identified: (1) Priority to young patients - the life cycle - a preferred tiebreaker; (2) Randomization - a tiebreaker of last resort; (3) Multiplier effect of most exposed healthcare workers - a median acceptability tiebreaker, and (4) Social value - a less acceptable tiebreaker. CONCLUSION: Life cycle was the preferred tiebreaker as this criterion respects intergenerational equity, which was considered relevant when allocating scarce resources to adult patients in a context of extreme pandemic. Priority to young patients is in line with other consultations conducted around the world. Additional studies are needed to further investigate the public acceptability of tiebreaker criteria.

Association of virtual end-of-life care with healthcare outcomes before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: A population-based study.

The use of virtual care for people at the end-of-life significantly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, but its association with acute healthcare use and location of death is unknown. The objective of this study was to measure the association between the use of virtual end-of-life care with acute healthcare use and an out-of-hospital death before vs. after the introduction of specialized fee codes that enabled broader delivery of virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic. This was a population-based cohort study of 323,995 adults in their last 90 days of life between January 25, 2018 and December 31, 2021 using health administrative data in Ontario, Canada. Primary outcomes were acute healthcare use (emergency department, hospitalization) and location of death (in or out-of-hospital). Prior to March 14, 2020, 13,974 (8%) people received at least 1 virtual end-of-life care visit, which was associated with a 16% higher rate of emergency department use (adjusted Rate Ratio [aRR] 1.16, 95%CI 1.12 to 1.20), a 17% higher rate of hospitalization (aRR 1.17, 95%CI 1.15 to 1.20), and a 34% higher risk of an out-of-hospital death (aRR 1.34, 95%CI 1.31 to 1.37) compared to people who did not receive virtual end-of-life care. After March 14, 2020, 104,165 (71%) people received at least 1 virtual end-of-life care visit, which was associated with a 58% higher rate of an emergency department visit (aRR 1.58, 95%CI 1.54 to 1.62), a 45% higher rate of hospitalization (aRR 1.45, 95%CI 1.42 to 1.47), and a 65% higher risk of an out-of-hospital death (aRR 1.65, 95%CI 1.61 to 1.69) compared to people who did not receive virtual end-of-life care. The use of virtual end-of-life care was associated with higher acute healthcare use in the last 90 days of life and a higher likelihood of dying out-of-hospital, and these rates increased during the pandemic.

Accelerated transcranial magnetic stimulation for psychological distress in advanced cancer: A phase 2a feasibility and preliminary efficacy clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Psychological and existential suffering affects many people with advanced illness, and current therapeutic options have limited effectiveness. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a safe and effective therapy for refractory depression, but no previous study has used rTMS to treat psychological or existential distress in the palliative setting. AIM: To determine whether a 5-day course of "accelerated" rTMS is feasible and can improve psychological and/or existential distress in a palliative care setting. DESIGN: Open-label, single arm, feasibility, and preliminary efficacy study of intermittent theta-burst stimulation to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, 600 pulses/session, 8 sessions/day (once per hour) for 5 days. The outcomes were the rates of recruitment, completion of intervention, and follow-up (Feasibility); and the proportion of participants achieving 50% improvement on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) or Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) 2 weeks post-treatment (Preliminary Efficacy). SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Adults admitted to our academic Palliative Care Unit with advanced illness, life expectancy >1 month and psychological distress. RESULTS: Due to COVID-19 pandemic-related interruptions, a total of nine participants were enrolled between August 2021 and April 2023. Two withdrew before starting rTMS, one stopped due to clinical deterioration unrelated to rTMS, and six completed the rTMS treatment. Five of six participants had a >50% improvement in HDRS, HADS-Anxiety, or both between baseline and the 2 week follow up; the sixth died prior to the 2-week follow-up. In this small sample, mean depression scores decreased from baseline to 2 weeks post-treatment (HDRS 18 vs 7, p = 0.03). Side effects of rTMS included transient mild scalp discomfort. CONCLUSIONS: Accelerated rTMS improved symptoms of depression, anxiety, or both in this small feasibility and preliminary efficacy study. A larger, sham-controlled study is warranted to determine whether rTMS could be an effective, acceptable, and scalable treatment in the palliative setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04257227.

Measuring the Use of End-of-Life Symptom Relief Medications in Long-Term Care Homes-a Qualitative Study.

Background: At the end of life, individuals may experience physical symptoms such as pain, and guidelines recommend medications to manage these symptoms. Yet, little is known about the symptom management long-term care (LTC) residents receive at the end of life. Our research team developed a metric-whether residents receive one or more prescriptions for an end-of-life symptom management medication in their last two weeks-to explore end-of-life care for LTC residents. This qualitative study aimed to inform the refinement of the end-of-life prescribing metric, including the acceptability and applicability to assess the quality of a resident's symptom management at end-of-life. Methods: We conducted 14 semi-structured interviews with Ontario health-care providers (physicians and nurses) who work in LTC homes and family caregivers of residents who died in LTC. Interviews were conducted virtually between February 2021 and December 2022, and were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: We identified three major themes relating to perceptions of the metric: 1) appropriateness, 2) health-care provider applicability, and 3) caregiver applicability. Participants noted that the metric may be appropriate to assess end-of-life care, but noted important nuances. Regarding applicability, health-care providers found value in the metric and that it could inform their practice. Conversely, caregivers found limited value in the metric. Conclusion: The proposed metric captures a very specific aspect of end-of-life care-whether end-of-life medications were prescribed or not. Participants deemed that the metric may reflect whether LTC homes have processes to manage a resident's end-of-life symptoms with medication. However, participants thought the metric could not provide a complete picture of end-of-life care and its quality.

Changes in End-of-Life Symptom Management Prescribing among Long-Term Care Residents during COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To examine changes in the prescribing of end-of-life symptom management medications in long-term care (LTC) homes during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using routinely collected health administrative data in Ontario, Canada. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We included all individuals who died in LTC homes between January 1, 2017, and March 31, 2021. We separated the study into 2 periods: before COVID-19 (January 1, 2017, to March 17, 2020) and during COVID-19 (March 18, 2020, to March 31, 2021). METHODS: For each LTC home, we measured the percentage of residents who died before and during COVID-19 who had a subcutaneous symptom management medication prescription in their last 14 days of life. We grouped LTC homes into quintiles based on their mean prescribing rates before COVID-19, and examined changes in prescribing during COVID-19 and COVID-19 outcomes across quintiles. RESULTS: We captured 75,438 LTC residents who died in Ontario's 626 LTC homes during the entire study period, with 19,522 (25.9%) dying during COVID-19. The mean prescribing rate during COVID-19 ranged from 46.9% to 79.4% between the lowest and highest prescribing quintiles. During COVID-19, the mean prescribing rate in the lowest prescribing quintile increased by 9.6% compared to before COVID-19. Compared to LTC homes in the highest prescribing quintile, homes in the lowest prescribing quintile experienced the highest proportion of COVID-19 outbreaks (73.4% vs 50.0%), the largest mean outbreak intensity (0.27 vs 0.09 cases/bed), the highest mean total days with a COVID-19 outbreak (72.7 vs 24.2 days), and the greatest proportion of decedents who were transferred and died outside of LTC (22.1% vs 8.6%). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: LTC homes in Ontario had wide variations in the prescribing rates of end-of-life symptom management medications before and during COVID-19. Homes in the lower prescribing quintiles had more COVID-19 cases per bed and days spent in an outbreak.

Socioeconomic Status, Palliative Care, and Death at Home Among Patients With Cancer Before and During COVID-19.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic had a profound impact on the delivery of cancer care, but less is known about its association with place of death and delivery of specialized palliative care (SPC) and potential disparities in these outcomes. Objective: To evaluate the association of the COVID-19 pandemic with death at home and SPC delivery at the end of life and to examine whether disparities in socioeconomic status exist for these outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, an interrupted time series analysis was conducted using Ontario Cancer Registry data comprising adult patients aged 18 years or older who died with cancer between the pre-COVID-19 (March 16, 2015, to March 15, 2020) and COVID-19 (March 16, 2020, to March 15, 2021) periods. The data analysis was performed between March and November 2023. Exposure: COVID-19-related hospital restrictions starting March 16, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes were death at home and SPC delivery at the end of life (last 30 days before death). Socioeconomic status was measured using Ontario Marginalization Index area-based material deprivation quintiles, with quintile 1 (Q1) indicating the least deprivation; Q3, intermediate deprivation; and Q5, the most deprivation. Segmented linear regression was used to estimate monthly trends in outcomes before, at the start of, and in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: Of 173 915 patients in the study cohort (mean [SD] age, 72.1 [12.5] years; males, 54.1% [95% CI, 53.8%-54.3%]), 83.7% (95% CI, 83.6%-83.9%) died in the pre-COVID-19 period and 16.3% (95% CI, 16.1%-16.4%) died in the COVID-19 period, 54.5% (95% CI, 54.2%-54.7%) died at home during the entire study period, and 57.8% (95% CI, 57.5%-58.0%) received SPC at the end of life. In March 2020, home deaths increased by 8.3% (95% CI, 7.4%-9.1%); however, this increase was less marked in Q5 (6.1%; 95% CI, 4.4%-7.8%) than in Q1 (11.4%; 95% CI, 9.6%-13.2%) and Q3 (10.0%; 95% CI, 9.0%-11.1%). There was a simultaneous decrease of 5.3% (95% CI, -6.3% to -4.4%) in the rate of SPC at the end of life, with no significant difference among quintiles. Patients who received SPC at the end of life (vs no SPC) were more likely to die at home before and during the pandemic. However, there was a larger immediate increase in home deaths among those who received no SPC at the end of life vs those who received SPC (Q1, 17.5% [95% CI, 15.2%-19.8%] vs 7.6% [95% CI, 5.4%-9.7%]; Q3, 12.7% [95% CI, 10.8%-14.5%] vs 9.0% [95% CI, 7.2%-10.7%]). For Q5, the increase in home deaths was significant only for patients who did not receive SPC (13.9% [95% CI, 11.9%-15.8%] vs 1.2% [95% CI, -1.0% to 3.5%]). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with amplified socioeconomic disparities in death at home and SPC delivery at the end of life. Future research should focus on the mechanisms of these disparities and on developing interventions to ensure equitable and consistent SPC access.

Palliative End-of-Life Medication Prescribing Rates in Long-Term Care: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Medications are often needed to manage distressing end-of-life symptoms (eg, pain, agitation). OBJECTIVES: In this study, we describe the variation in prescribing rates of symptom relief medications at the end of life among long-term care (LTC) decedents. We evaluate the extent these medications are prescribed in LTC homes and whether prescribing rates of end-of-life symptom management can be used as an indicator of quality end-of-life care. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using administrative health data. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: LTC decedents in all 626 publicly funded LTC homes in Ontario, Canada, between January 1, 2017, and March 17, 2020. METHODS: For each LTC home, we measured the percent of decedents who received 1+ prescription(s) for a subcutaneous end-of-life symptom management medication ("end-of-life medication") in their last 14 days of life. We then ranked LTC homes into quintiles based on prescribing rates. RESULTS: We identified 55,916 LTC residents who died in LTC. On average, two-thirds of decedents (64.7%) in LTC homes were prescribed at least 1 subcutaneous end-of-life medication in the last 2 weeks of life. Opioids were the most common prescribed medication (overall average prescribing rate of 62.7%). LTC homes in the lowest prescribing quintile had a mean of 37.3% of decedents prescribed an end-of-life medication, and the highest quintile mean was 82.5%. In addition, across these quintiles, the lowest prescribing quintile had a high average (30.3%) of LTC residents transferred out of LTC in the 14 days compared with the highest prescribing quintile (12.7%). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Across Ontario's LTC homes, there are large differences in prescribing rates for subcutaneous end-of-life symptom relief medications. Although future work may elucidate why the variability exists, this study provides evidence that administrative data can provide valuable insight into the systemic delivery of end-of-life care.

Society of Critical Care Medicine Guidelines on Recognizing and Responding to Clinical Deterioration Outside the ICU: 2023.

RATIONALE: Clinical deterioration of patients hospitalized outside the ICU is a source of potentially reversible morbidity and mortality. To address this, some acute care hospitals have implemented systems aimed at detecting and responding to such patients. OBJECTIVES: To provide evidence-based recommendations for hospital clinicians and administrators to optimize recognition and response to clinical deterioration in non-ICU patients. PANEL DESIGN: The 25-member panel included representatives from medicine, nursing, respiratory therapy, pharmacy, patient/family partners, and clinician-methodologists with expertise in developing evidence-based Clinical Practice Guidelines. METHODS: We generated actionable questions using the Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes (PICO) format and performed a systematic review of the literature to identify and synthesize the best available evidence. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Approach to determine certainty in the evidence and to formulate recommendations and good practice statements (GPSs). RESULTS: The panel issued 10 statements on recognizing and responding to non-ICU patients with critical illness. Healthcare personnel and institutions should ensure that all vital sign acquisition is timely and accurate (GPS). We make no recommendation on the use of continuous vital sign monitoring among unselected patients. We suggest focused education for bedside clinicians in signs of clinical deterioration, and we also suggest that patient/family/care partners' concerns be included in decisions to obtain additional opinions and help (both conditional recommendations). We recommend hospital-wide deployment of a rapid response team or medical emergency team (RRT/MET) with explicit activation criteria (strong recommendation). We make no recommendation about RRT/MET professional composition or inclusion of palliative care members on the responding team but suggest that the skill set of responders should include eliciting patients' goals of care (conditional recommendation). Finally, quality improvement processes should be part of a rapid response system. CONCLUSIONS: The panel provided guidance to inform clinicians and administrators on effective processes to improve the care of patients at-risk for developing critical illness outside the ICU.

Executive Summary: Society of Critical Care Medicine Guidelines on Recognizing and Responding to Clinical Deterioration Outside the ICU.

RATIONALE: Clinical deterioration of patients hospitalized outside the ICU is a source of potentially reversible morbidity and mortality. To address this, some acute care facilities have implemented systems aimed at detecting and responding to such patients. OBJECTIVES: To provide evidence-based recommendations for hospital clinicians and administrators to optimize recognition and response to clinical deterioration in non-ICU patients. PANEL DESIGN: The 25-member panel included representatives from medicine, nursing, respiratory therapy, pharmacy, patient/family partners, and clinician-methodologists with expertise in developing evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. METHODS: We generated actionable questions using the Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes format and performed a systematic review of the literature to identify and synthesize the best available evidence. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to determine certainty in the evidence and to formulate recommendations and good practice statements (GPSs). RESULTS: The panel issued 10 statements on recognizing and responding to non-ICU patients with critical illness. Healthcare personnel and institutions should ensure that all vital sign acquisition is timely and accurate (GPS). We make no recommendation on the use of continuous vital sign monitoring among "unselected" patients due to the absence of data regarding the benefit and the potential harms of false positive alarms, the risk of alarm fatigue, and cost. We suggest focused education for bedside clinicians in signs of clinical deterioration, and we also suggest that patient/family/care partners' concerns be included in decisions to obtain additional opinions and help (both conditional recommendations). We recommend hospital-wide deployment of a rapid response team or medical emergency team (RRT/MET) with explicit activation criteria (strong recommendation). We make no recommendation about RRT/MET professional composition or inclusion of palliative care members on the responding team but suggest that the skill set of responders should include eliciting patients' goals of care (conditional recommendation). Finally, quality improvement processes should be part of a rapid response system (GPS). CONCLUSIONS: The panel provided guidance to inform clinicians and administrators on effective processes to improve the care of patients at-risk for developing critical illness outside the ICU.

Long-term bereavement outcomes in family members of those who died in acute care hospitals before and during the first wave of COVID-19: A cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Severe grief is highly distressing and prevalent up to 1 year post-death among people bereaved during the first wave of COVID-19, but no study has assessed changes in grief severity beyond this timeframe. AIM: Understand the trajectory of grief during the pandemic by reassessing grief symptoms in our original cohort 12-18 months post-death. DESIGN: Prospective matched cohort study. SETTINGS/PARTICIPANTS: Family members of decedents who died in an acute care hospital between November 1, 2019 and August 31, 2020 in Ottawa, Canada. Family members of patients who died of COVID (COVID +ve) were matched 2:1 with those who died of non-COVID illness (COVID -ve) during pandemic wave 1 or immediately prior to its onset (pre-COVID). Grief was assessed using the Inventory of Complicated Grief (ICG). RESULTS: Follow-up assessment was completed by 92% (111/121) of family members in the initial cohort. Mean ICG score on the 12-18-month assessment was 19.9 (SD = 11.8), and severe grief (ICG > 25) was present in 28.8% of participants. One-third (33.3%) had either a persistently high (>25) or worsening ICG score (⩾4-point increase between assessments). Using a modified Poisson regression analysis, persistently high or worsening ICG scores were associated with endotracheal intubation in the deceased, but not cause of death (COVID +ve, COVID -ve, pre-COVID) or physical presence of the family member in the final 48 h of life. CONCLUSIONS: Severe grief is a substantial source of psychological morbidity in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, persisting more than a year post-death. Our findings highlight an acute need for effective and scalable means of addressing severe grief.