"But I Have a Pacer There Is No Point in Engaging in Hypothetical Scenarios": A Non-Imminently Dying Patient's Request for Pacemaker Deactivation.

In this case report, we describe a woman with advancing dementia who still retained decisional capacity and was able to clearly articulate her request for deactivation of her implanted cardiac pacemaker-a scenario that would result in her death. In this case, the patient had the autonomy to make her decision, but clinicians at an outside hospital refused to deactivate her pacemaker even though they were in unanimous agreement that the patient had capacity to make this decision, citing personal discomfort and a belief that her decision seemed out of proportion to her suffering. We evaluated her at our hospital, found her to have decision-making capacity, and deactivated her pacer resulting in her death about 9 days later. While some clinicians may be comfortable discussing patient preferences for device deactivation in patients who are imminently dying, we can find no reports in the literature of requests for device deactivation from patients with terminal diagnoses who are not imminently dying.

Palliative care referral across the disease trajectory in high-grade glioma.

PURPOSE: Adults with high-grade glioma (HGG), WHO grade III or IV, have substantial palliative care needs. Our aim was to determine occurrence, timing, and factors associated with palliative care consultation (PCC) in HGG at one large academic institution. METHODS: HGG patients receiving care between 08/1/2011 and 01/23/2020 were identified retrospectively from a multi-center healthcare system cancer registry. Patients were stratified by any PCC (yes/no), and timing of initial PCC by disease phase: diagnosis (before radiation), during initial treatment (first-line chemotherapy/radiation), second-line treatment(s), or end-of-life (after last chemotherapy). RESULTS: Of 621 HGG patients, 134 (21.58%) received PCC with the vast majority occurring during hospital admission [111 (82.84%)]. Of the 134, 14 (10.45%) were referred during the diagnostic phase; 35 (26.12%) during initial treatment; 20 (14.93%) during second-line treatment; and 65 (48.51%) during end of life. In multivariable logistic regression, only higher Charlson Comorbidity Index was associated with greater odds of PCC [OR 1.3 (95% CI 1.2-1.4), p < 0.01]; but not age or histopathology. Patients who received PCC prior to end of life had longer survival from diagnosis than those referred during end of life [16.5 (8, 24) months vs. 11 (4, 17); p < 0.01]. CONCLUSION: A minority of HGG patients ever received PCC, which primarily occurred in the inpatient setting, and nearly half during the end-of-life phase. Thus, only about one in ten patients in the entire cohort potentially received the benefits of earlier PCC despite earlier referral having an association with longer survival. Further studies should elucidate barriers and facilitators to early PCC in HGG.

Differences between patients with cardiovascular disease and cancer referred for palliative care.

Our analysis from a national registry shows that compared to cancer, cardiovascular disease patients referred to palliative care are a decade older, have worse functional status and clinician-estimated prognosis. Both groups have very high symptom burden, with cardiovascular disease patients experiencing more dyspnea while pain, nausea, and fatigue are more common in cancer.

Non-Concordance between Patient and Clinician Estimates of Prognosis in Advanced Heart Failure.

IMPORTANCE: Despite efforts to enhance serious illness communication, patients with advanced heart failure (HF) lack prognostic understanding. OBJECTIVES: To determine rate of concordance between HF patients' estimation of their prognosis and their physician's estimate of the patient's prognosis, and to compare patient characteristics associated with concordance. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of a cluster randomized controlled trial with 24-month follow-up and analysis completed on 09/01/2020. Patients were enrolled in inpatient and outpatient settings between September 2011 to February 2016 and data collection continued until the last quarter of 2017. SETTING: Six teaching hospitals in the U.S. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with advanced HF and implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) at high risk of death. Of 537 patients in the parent study, 407 had complete data for this analysis. INTERVENTION: A multi-component communication intervention on conversations between HF clinicians and their patients regarding ICD deactivation and advance care planning. MAIN OUTCOME(S) AND MEASURE(S): Patient self-report of prognosis and physician response to the "surprise question" of 12-month prognosis. Patient-physician prognostic concordance (PPPC) measured in percentage agreement and kappa. Bivariate analyses of characteristics of patients with and without PPPC. RESULTS: Among 407 patients (mean age 62.1 years, 29.5% female, 42.4% non-white), 300 (73.7%) dyads had non-PPPC; of which 252 (84.0%) reported a prognosis >1 year when their physician estimated <1 year. Only 107 (26.3%) had PPPC with prognosis of ≤ 1 year (n=20 patients) or > 1 year (n=87 patients); (Κ = -0.20, p = 1.0). Of those with physician estimated prognosis of < 1 year, non-PPPC was more likely among patients with lower symptom burden- number and severity (both p ≤.001), without completed advance directive (p=.001). Among those with physician prognosis estimate > 1 year, no patient characteristic was associated with PPPC or non-PPPC. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Non-PPPC between HF patients and their physicians is high. HF patients are more optimistic than clinicians in estimating life expectancy. These data demonstrate there are opportunities to improve the quality of prognosis disclosure between patients with advanced HF and their physicians. Interventions to improve PPPC might include serious illness communication training.

"Why Would I Choose Death?": A Qualitative Study of Patient Understanding of the Role and Limitations of Cardiac Devices.

BACKGROUND: Although cardiology organizations recommend early introduction of palliative care for patients with heart failure (HF), integration has remained challenging, particularly in patients with cardiac devices such as cardiac implantable electronic devices and left ventricular assist devices. Study authors suggest that patients often have limited and erroneous understanding of these devices and their implications for future care. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess perceptions of cardiac devices in patients with HF and how these perceptions impacted advance care planning and future expectations. METHODS: This study used qualitative semistructured interviews with 18 community-dwelling patients with New York Heart Association stage II to IV HF. RESULTS: We interviewed 18 patients (mean ejection fraction, 38%; mean age, 64 years; 33% female; 83% white; 39% New York Heart Association class II, 39% class III, and 22% class IV). All had a cardiac implantable electronic device (6% permanent pacemaker, 56% implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, 28% biventricular implantable cardioverter-defibrillator); 11% had left ventricular assist devices. Patients with devices frequently misunderstood the impact of their device on cardiac function. A majority expressed the belief that the device would forestall further deterioration, regardless of whether this was the case. This anticipation of stability was often accompanied by the expectation that emerging technologies would continue to preempt decline. Citing this faith in technology, these patients frequently saw limited value in advance care planning. CONCLUSIONS: In our sample, patients with cardiac devices overestimated the impact of their devices on preventing disease progression and death and deprioritized advance care planning as a result.

State of Research on Palliative Care in Heart Failure as Evidenced by Published Literature, Conference Proceedings, and NIH Funding.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) is the most common diagnosis in hospitalized patients older than 65 years of age. Although these patients often need specialist-directed palliative care, <10% ever receive these services. This may be due to a lack of evidence examining the benefits of palliative care for these patients. To understand the current state of research on the interface of palliative care and HF, we examined trends in publications, presentations at national meetings, and National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding. METHODS: Using key terms, we identified items about palliative care and HF in the following sources: (1) the tables of contents of nine leading cardiology journals, (2) abstracts of conference proceedings from four cardiology societies, and (3) all NIH grants from 2009 to 2013. RESULTS: Of the journals reviewed, fewer than 1% of their publications related to palliative care. Less than 2% of HF-related sessions in conference proceedings mentioned palliative care. Of the NIH's $45 billion directed to HF research, only $14 million (0.03%) was spent on palliative care research. CONCLUSIONS: Despite calls for improving palliative care for patients with advanced HF, a lack of sufficient attention persists in research abstracts, concurrent sessions at national meetings, and NIH funding to increase the evidence base. Without these improvements, the ability to deliver high-quality specialist palliative care to patients with HF and their families will remain severely limited.

Primary palliative care for heart failure: what is it? How do we implement it?

Heart failure (HF) is a chronic and progressive illness, which affects a growing number of adults, and is associated with a high morbidity and mortality, as well as significant physical and psychological symptom burden on both patients with HF and their families. Palliative care is the multidisciplinary specialty focused on optimizing quality of life and reducing suffering for patients and families facing serious illness, regardless of prognosis. Palliative care can be delivered as (1) specialist palliative care in which a palliative care specialist with subspecialty palliative care training consults or co-manages patients to address palliative needs alongside clinicians who manage the underlying illness or (2) as primary palliative care in which the primary clinician (such as the internist, cardiologist, cardiology nurse, or HF specialist) caring for the patient with HF provides the essential palliative domains. In this paper, we describe the key domains of primary palliative care for patients with HF and offer some specific ways in which primary palliative care and specialist palliative care can be offered in this population. Although there is little research on HF primary palliative care, primary palliative care in HF offers a key opportunity to ensure that this population receives high-quality palliative care in spite of the growing numbers of patients with HF as well as the limited number of specialist palliative care providers.

Dyadic psychosocial intervention for advanced lung cancer patients and their family caregivers: results of a randomized pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: Advanced lung cancer (LC) patients and their families have reported low self-efficacy for self-care/caregiving and high rates of distress, yet few programs exist to address their supportive care needs during treatment. This pilot study examined the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a 6-session, telephone-based dyadic psychosocial intervention that was developed for advanced LC patients and their caregivers. The program was grounded in self-determination theory (SDT), which emphasizes the importance of competence (self-efficacy), autonomy (sense of choice/volition), and relatedness (sense of belonging/connection) for psychological functioning. The primary outcomes were patient and caregiver psychological functioning (depression/anxiety) and caregiver burden. The secondary outcomes were the SDT constructs of competence, autonomy, and relatedness. METHODS: Thirty-nine advanced LC patients who were within 1 month of treatment initiation (baseline) and their caregivers (51% spouses/partners) completed surveys and were randomized to the intervention or usual medical care. Eight weeks after baseline, they completed follow-up surveys. RESULTS: Solid recruitment (60%) and low attrition rates demonstrated feasibility. Strong program evaluations (mean, 8.6/10) and homework completion rates (88%) supported acceptability. Participants receiving the intervention evidenced significant improvements (P < .0001) in depression, anxiety, and caregiver burden in comparison with usual medical care. Large effect sizes (d ≥ 1.2) favoring the intervention were also found for patient and caregiver competence and relatedness and for caregiver autonomous motivation for providing care. CONCLUSION: These findings support intervention feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy. By empowering families with the skills to coordinate care and meet the challenges of LC together, this intervention holds great promise for improving palliative/supportive care services in cancer.

Effects of Primary Care-Led, Integrated Palliative Care for Medicare Patients in a Value-Based Model.

CONTEXT: Faced with a projected shortage of specialized palliative care physicians, scalable palliative solutions are required to better meet the aging population's needs. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether a multi-site, primary care-led, integrated palliative care model improves clinical, utilization, and economic outcomes. METHODS: Propensity score-matched comparison group formed from participants who were Medicare beneficiaries, died January 1, 2021-January 31, 2023, were patients of eight primary care practices that partner with agilon health, and enrolled in palliative care for at least seven days. Each practice operates in a value-based model, where primary care providers (PCPs) take on full-risk for the cost and quality of patient outcomes. Each program includes symptom management, defining goals of care/advance directives, PCP care coordination, and assistance with care transitions if patients enroll in hospice. RESULTS: Final sample included 1778 decedents, with 889 in both enrolled and matched cohorts, average age 83. Palliative care is associated with improved patient outcomes from palliative care enrollment until death, including 5.4 more days at home (p < 0.001), 0.4 fewer hospitalizations (p < 0.001), 17% fewer deaths in a hospital (p < 0.001), and $10,393 lower overall healthcare costs (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: A primary care-led, integrated approach of delivering palliative care within a full-risk model can be an effective care delivery mechanism to meet the healthcare needs of an aging population by impacting patient outcomes and reducing avoidable utilization and cost at the end of life. These findings demonstrate that PCPs in a scaled, full-risk model can simultaneously improve care for patients while reducing costs to the healthcare system.

"Life Gets Turned Upside-Down " Opportunities to Improve Palliative Care for High-Grade Glioma.

CONTEXT: Early palliative care referral is recommended broadly in oncology. Yet, few patients with high-grade gliomas (HGG) - highly aggressive brain tumors - receive specialty palliative care consultation. OBJECTIVES: To delineate unique needs of HGG patients relative to other oncology patients according to perceptions of a diverse sample of US palliative medicine physicians and neuro-oncologists in each of the eight domains of palliative care; and to describe contrasts between physician specialties on indications for and timing of specialty palliative care referrals in HGG. METHODS: Between September 2021 and May 2023, we conducted semi-structured, 40-minute interviews with ten palliative medicine physicians and ten neuro-oncologists. Participants were recruited via purposive sampling for diversity in geographic setting, years in practice, and practice structure. Interviews were audio-recorded, professionally transcribed, and coded by two investigators. Data were analyzed thematically using a qualitative, phenomenological approach. RESULTS: The palliative care needs of HGG relative to other cancers across palliative care domains are distinguished by poor prognosis, physical and cognitive deficits, and neuropsychiatric symptoms. Themes on indications for palliative care referral differed between neuro-oncologists and palliative physicians. Neuro-oncologists favored selective referral for clinical indications such as high non-neurologic symptom burden requiring time-intensive management. Palliative physicians favored early referral of most HGG patients, to allow for maximal benefit across HGG trajectory. CONCLUSION: Patients with HGG have unique palliative care needs that affect palliative care delivery across care domains. Bidirectional education, enhanced collaboration, and consensus guidelines may help overcome barriers to specialty palliative care referral.

A randomized controlled trial of a novel home-based palliative care program: A report of a trial that could not be completed.

BACKGROUND: In response to a growing need for accessible, efficient, and effective palliative care services, we designed, implemented, and evaluated a novel palliative care at home (PC@H) model for people with serious illness that is centered around a community health worker, a registered nurse, and a social worker, with an advanced practice nurse and a physician for support. Our objectives were to measure the impact of receipt of PC@H on patient symptoms, quality of life, and healthcare utilization and costs. METHODS: We enrolled 136 patients with serious illness in this parallel, randomized controlled trial. Our primary outcome was change in symptom burden at 6 weeks. Secondary outcomes included change in symptom burden at 3 months, change in quality of life at 6 weeks and 3 months, estimated using a group t-test. In an exploratory aim, we examined the impact of PC@H on healthcare utilization and cost using a generalized linear model. RESULTS: PC@H resulted in a greater improvement in patient symptoms at 6 weeks (1.30 score improvement, n = 37) and 3 months (3.14 score improvement, n = 21) compared with controls. There were no differences in healthcare utilization and costs between the two groups. Unfortunately, due to the COVID-19 pandemic and a loss of funding, the trial was not able to be completed as originally intended. CONCLUSIONS: A palliative care at home model that leverages community health workers, registered nurses, and social workers as the primary deliverers of care may result in improved patient symptoms and quality of life compared with standard care. We did not demonstrate significant differences in healthcare utilization and cost associated with receipt of PC@H, likely due to inability to reach the intended sample size and insufficient statistical power, due to elements beyond the investigators' control such as the COVID-19 public health emergency and changes in grant funding.

Educational and psychological interventions to improve outcomes for recipients of implantable cardioverter defibrillators and their families: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association.

Significant mortality benefits have been documented in recipients of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs); however, the psychosocial distress created by the underlying arrhythmia and its potential treatments in patients and family members may be underappreciated by clinical care teams. The disentanglement of cardiac disease and device-related concerns is difficult. The majority of ICD patients and families successfully adjust to the ICD, but optimal care pathways may require additional psychosocial attention to all ICD patients and particularly those experiencing psychosocial distress. This state-of-the-science report was developed on the basis of an analysis and critique of existing science to (1) describe the psychological and quality-of-life outcomes after receipt of an ICD and describe related factors, such as patient characteristics; (2) describe the concerns and educational/informational needs of ICD patients and their family members; (3) outline the evidence that supports interventions for improving educational and psychological outcomes for ICD patients; (4) provide recommendations for clinical approaches for improving patient outcomes; and (5) identify priorities for future research in this area. The ultimate goal of this statement is to improve the precision of identification and care of psychosocial distress in ICD patients to maximize the derived benefit of the ICD.

Palliative care in heart failure guidelines: A comparison of the 2021 ESC and the 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA guidelines on heart failure.

The role of palliative care for patients with heart failure (HF) is discussed in both most recent HF guidelines, the 2021 ESC guideline and the 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA guideline. This review compares the definitions, concepts and specific recommendations regarding palliative care for patients with HF in these two guidelines. Both HF guidelines define palliative care as a multidisciplinary approach aimed at alleviating physical, psychological and spiritual distress of patients and caregivers. Both agree emphatically on the importance of palliative care across all stages of HF with integration early in the illness trajectory. Also, the guidelines concur that palliative care should include symptom management, communication about prognosis and life-sustaining therapies, as well as advance care planning. Despite this consensus, only the AHA/ACC/HFSA guideline gives official recommendations on the provision of palliative care. Moreover, the AHA/ACC/HFSA guideline advocates for a needs-based approach to palliative care allocation while the ESC guideline ties palliative care closely to advanced HF and end-of-life care. The ESC guideline highlights the need for regular symptom assessment and provides detailed guidance on symptom management. The AHA/ACC/HFSA guideline elaborates further on shared decision-making, caregiver and bereavement support, as well as hospice care, and distinguishes between primary palliative care (provided by all clinicians) and secondary (specialty-level) palliative care. Although there is strong agreement on the importance and components of palliative care for patients with HF, there are nuanced differences between the two HF guidelines. Most notably, only the AHA/ACC/HFSA guideline issues recommendations for the provision of palliative care.

Using Latent Class Analysis to Identify Different Clinical Profiles Among Patients With Advanced Heart Failure.

Context: Although palliative care is guideline-indicated for patients with advanced heart failure (HF), the scarcity of a specialty-trained palliative care workforce demands better identification of patients who are most burdened by the disease. Objectives: We sought to identify latent subgroups with variations regarding symptom burden, functional status, and multimorbidity in an advanced HF population. Methods: We performed a latent class analysis (LCA) of baseline data from a trial enrolling advanced HF patients. As LCA input variables, we chose indicators of HF severity, physical and psychological symptom burden, functional status, and the number of comorbidities. Results: Among 563 patients, two subgroups emerged from LCA, Class A (352 [62.5%]) and Class B (211 [37.5%]). Patients in Class A were less often classified as NYHA class III or IV (88.0% vs. 97.5%, P < 0.001), as compared to Class B patients. Class A patients had fewer symptoms, fewer comorbidities, only 25.9% had impairments in activities of daily living (ADL), and virtually none suffered from clinically significant anxiety (0.4%) or depression (0.9%). In Class B, every patient reported more than three symptoms, almost all patients (92.6%) had some impairment in ADL, and nearly a third had anxiety (30.2%) or depression (28.3%). All-cause mortality after 12 months was higher in Class B, as compared to Class A (18.5% vs. 12.5%, P = 0.047). Conclusion: Among advanced HF patients, we identified a distinct subgroup characterized by a conjunction of high symptom burden, anxiety, depression, multimorbidity, and functional status impairment, which might profit particularly from palliative care interventions. J Pain Symptom Manage 2022;000:1-9.

Clinician Perspectives on Palliative Care for People with Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Facilitators of and Barriers to Referral.

(1) Background: Little is known about facilitators of and barriers to palliative care referral for people with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The objective of this study is to identify facilitators and barriers of palliative care referral described by HCC-treating clinicians. (2) Methods: Semi-structured interviews (n = 16) were conducted with HCC-treating clinicians at two centers, focusing on referral patterns, palliative care needs, and disease course. A code book was created, axial coding was used to code all interviews, and selective coding was used to identify facilitators and barriers of palliative care referral. (3) Results: Facilitators included helpfulness at times of transition; help with management of certain symptoms; provision of psychosocial support; and positive experiences with referral. Barriers included feasibility concerns; lack of information about palliative care and who is appropriate; lack of symptoms requiring outside referral; and concerns that palliative care conveys loss of hope. (4) Conclusions: Participants noted the helpfulness of palliative care at specific points in the disease trajectory and cited barriers related to feasibility, lack of need, lack of awareness, and loss of hope. The results show actionable issues that can be addressed in future research to leverage the benefits of and overcome the barriers to palliative care for people with HCC.

Building a Cardiac Palliative Care Program: A Qualitative Study of the Experiences of Ten Program Leaders From Across the United States.

CONTEXT: Palliative care is guideline-recommended for patients with advanced heart failure (HF). However, studies on how cardiac palliative care is provided in the United States are lacking. OBJECTIVES: To study how cardiac palliative care programs provide services, and to identify challenges and facilitators they encountered in program development. METHODS: In this qualitative descriptive study, we used purposive and snowball sampling approaches to identify cardiac palliative care program leaders across the United States, administered a survey and conducted semi-structured interviews. Interview transcripts were coded and evaluated using thematic analysis. RESULTS: While cardiac palliative care programs vary in their organizational setup, they all provide comprehensive interdisciplinary palliative care services, ideally across the care continuum. They predominantly serve HF patients who are evaluated for advanced therapies or have complex needs. The challenges which cardiac palliative care programs face include reaching those cardiac patients who need palliative care the most and collaborating with cardiologists who do not see value added from palliative care for their patients. Facilitators of cardiac palliative care program development include building personal relationships with cardiology providers, proactively assessing local institution needs, and tailoring palliative care services to meet patient and provider needs. CONCLUSION: Cardiac palliative care programs vary in their organizational setup but provide similar services and face similar challenges. The challenges and facilitators we identified can inform the development of future cardiac palliative care programs.

Enhancing Palliative Care for Patients With Advanced Heart Failure Through Simple Prognostication Tools: A Comparison of the Surprise Question, the Number of Previous Heart Failure Hospitalizations, and the Seattle Heart Failure Model for Predicting 1-Year Survival.

Background: Score-based survival prediction in patients with advanced heart failure (HF) is complicated. Easy-to-use prognostication tools could inform clinical decision-making and palliative care delivery. Objective: To compare the prognostic utility of the Seattle HF model (SHFM), the surprise question (SQ), and the number of HF hospitalizations (NoH) within the last 12 months for predicting 1-year survival in patients with advanced HF. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from a cluster-randomized controlled trial of advanced HF patients, predominantly with reduced ejection fraction. Primary outcome was the prognostic discrimination of SHFM, SQ ("Would you be surprised if this patient were to die within 1 year?") answered by HF cardiologists, and NoH, assessed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Optimal cut-offs were calculated using Youden's index (SHFM: <86% predicted 1-year survival; NoH ≥ 2). Results: Of 535 subjects, 82 (15.3%) had died after 1-year of follow-up. SHFM, SQ, and NoH yielded a similar area under the ROC curve [SHFM: 0.65 (0.60-0.71 95% CI); SQ: 0.58 (0.54-0.63 95% CI); NoH: 0.56 (0.50-0.62 95% CI)] and similar sensitivity [SHFM: 0.76 (0.65-0.84 95% CI); SQ: 0.84 (0.74-0.91 95% CI); NoH: 0.56 (0.45-0.67 95% CI)]. As compared to SHFM, SQ had lower specificity [SQ: 0.33 (0.28-0.37 95% CI) vs. SHFM: 0.55 (0.50-0.60 95% CI)] while NoH had similar specificity [0.56 (0.51-0.61 95% CI)]. SQ combined with NoH showed significantly higher specificity [0.68 (0.64-0.73 95% CI)]. Conclusion: SQ and NoH yielded comparable utility to SHFM for 1-year survival prediction among advanced HF patients, are easy-to-use and could inform bedside decision-making.

Impact of radiotherapy on daily function among older adults living with advanced cancer (RT impact on function in advanced cancer).

BACKGROUND: While radiation therapy (RT) improves function, and quality of life for patients with advanced cancers, patients frequently experience a period of acute toxicity during which functional abilities may decline. Little is understood about changes in functional outcomes after RT in older adults. This study aims to examine changes in daily function at 1 and 6 months following RT. METHODS: We reviewed the charts of 117 patients who underwent palliative RT on a prospective registry. Activities of daily living (ADL) and instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) scores ranging from 0 to 6 and 0-8, respectively, were collected at baseline, one-month, and six months post-RT. Patients were classified as low deficit for ADL/IADL if they had 0-1 deficits and high deficit if they had 2+ deficits. RESULTS: One-hundred seventy RT courses were identified; 99 were evaluable at each time point. The median age was 67 years. At baseline, 29.5 and 29.9% of patients were classified as high-deficit for ADL and IADL functioning, respectively. At one-month, the majority of patients who were low-deficit at baseline remained so for both measures while approximately one quarter of high-deficit patients showed improvement. Most patients identified as low-deficit at one-month remained so at six-months, while no high-deficit patients improved from one- to six-months. Factors associated with high ADL and IADL deficits included: time (six months), increasing age, and Hispanic/other race. Compared to those with ECOG score of 3, patients with lower scores (0-2) had lower odds of high deficit. CONCLUSION: ADL and IADL tools may be useful in describing changes in daily function after palliative RT and in identifying groups of patients who may benefit from additional supportive geriatric care interventions.