A Process Evaluation of a Palliative Care Social Work Intervention for Cancer Patients in Skilled Nursing Facilities.

Background: Assessing and Listening to Individual Goals and Needs (ALIGN) is a palliative care social work intervention that aims to improve delivery of goal-concordant care for hospitalized older adults with cancer discharged to skilled nursing facilities. Objective: Explore processes through which ALIGN may improve delivery of goal-concordant care to substantiate the conceptual model grounding the intervention and to inform mechanistic hypotheses of how the intervention might be effective. Design: A process evaluation triangulating findings from patient and caregiver interviews with a matrix analysis of ALIGN social worker notes. Setting/Participants: Patients (n = 6) and caregivers (n = 13) who participated in a single-arm pilot study of ALIGN in the United States and 113 intervention notes (n = 18 patients) written by 2 ALIGN social workers. Measurement: Qualitative thematic content analysis Results: Themes included the following: (1) ALIGN helped reconcile participants' misaligned expectations of rehabilitation with the reality of the patient's progressive illness; (2) ALIGN helped participants manage uncertainty and stress about forthcoming medical decision making; (3) the longitudinal nature of ALIGN allowed for iterative value-based goals of care discussions during a time when patients were changing their focus of treatment; and (4) ALIGN activated participants to advocate for their needs. Conclusions: ALIGN offers support in prognostic understanding, communication, and decision making during a pivotal time when patient and caregivers' goals have not been met and they are reassessing priorities. A larger trial is needed to understand how these processes may improve the ability of participants to make value-based decisions and aide in delivery of goal-concordant care. Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT04882111.

Unintended consequences of methadone regulation for opioid use disorder treatment among hospitalized patients.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, there are no federal restrictions on the use of methadone to manage opioid withdrawal symptoms when patients are hospitalized with a medical or surgical condition other than addiction. In contrast, in an outpatient setting, methadone for opioid use disorder (OUD) is highly regulated by federal and state governments and can only be dispensed from an opioid treatment program (OTP). Discrepancies in regulatory requirements across these settings may lead to barriers in care for patients with OUD. OBJECTIVE: Identify how methadone regulation impacts the care of patients with OUD during hospitalization, care transitions, and in the OTP setting. METHODS: We completed 26 interviews with clinicians and social workers working on hospital-based addiction consultation services across the United States. Study findings are the result of a secondary content analysis of interviews to identifying the word "methadone" and construct themes resulting from the data. RESULTS: We identified three major themes related to "methadone" for OUD treatment, all of which impacted patient care: (1) limited OTP hours leads to tenuous or delayed hospital discharges; (2) inadequate information-sharing between hospitals and OTPs leads to delays in care; and (3) methadone regulations create treatment barriers for the most vulnerable patients. CONCLUSION: Strict methadone regulations have resulted in unintended consequences for patients with OUD in the hospital setting, during care transitions, and in the OTP setting. Recent and ongoing federal efforts to reform methadone provision may improve some of the reported challenges, but significant hurdles remain in providing safe, equitable care to hospitalized patients with OUD.

Care challenges of home health patients living with dementia: a pathway forward with palliative care.

BACKGROUND: Home health care (HHC) is a leading source of care support for older adults with serious illness, particularly patients living with dementia (PLWD). Demand for HHC is expected to continue to grow, driven by an aging population and preference for non-institutional care. HHC agencies are frequently under pressure to find effective approaches for improving care delivery and quality. One strategy that has the potential to improve the quality of life and patient satisfaction in HHC for PLWD is the integration of palliative care. Therefore, we sought to understand the experiences and needs of PLWD and their family caregivers specifically focusing on ways that HHC and palliative care may be integrated as part of the care transition from hospital to home, to better support PLWD and their families. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive qualitative study focusing on the perspectives of patients, caregivers, and healthcare team members about palliative care delivery for patients receiving HHC. Interviews were audio-recorded and professionally transcribed. In this analysis, we specifically report on dementia-related content using an iterative, team-based thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: We identified three themes: 1) 'Living in the Whirlwind' which describes the many competing demands on caregivers time and the associated feeling of loss of control, 2) 'Thinking Ahead' which describes the importance of thinking beyond the day-to-day tasks to begin planning for the future, and 3) 'Pathways Forward' which describes the integration of palliative care into HHC to provide enhanced support for PLWD and their caregivers. CONCLUSION: In this qualitative study, our formative work identified the importance of providing anticipatory guidance (e.g., safety, advance care planning) coupled with emotional and pragmatic care supports (e.g., finding resources, navigating insurance) to sustain caregivers who are struggling with the whirlwind.

Clinician challenges to evidence-based prescribing for heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: A qualitative evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Reasons for suboptimal prescribing for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) have been identified, but it is unclear if they remain relevant with recent advances in healthcare delivery and technologies. This study aimed to identify and understand current clinician-perceived challenges to prescribing guideline-directed HFrEF medications. METHODS: We conducted content analysis methodology, including interviews and member-checking focus groups with primary care and cardiology clinicians. Interview guides were informed by the Cabana Framework. RESULTS: We conducted interviews with 33 clinicians (13 cardiology specialists, 22 physicians) and member checking with 10 of these. We identified four levels of challenges from the clinician perspective. Clinician level challenges included misconceptions about guideline recommendations, clinician assumptions (e.g., drug cost or affordability), and clinical inertia. Patient-clinician level challenges included misalignment of priorities and insufficient communication. Clinician-clinician level challenges were primarily between generalists and specialists, including lack of role clarity, competing priorities of providing focused versus holistic care, and contrasting confidence regarding safety of newer drugs. Policy and system/organisation level challenges included insufficient access to timely/reliable patient data, and unintended care gaps for medications without financially incentivized metrics. CONCLUSION: This study presents current challenges faced by cardiology and primary care which can be used to strategically design interventions to improve guideline-directed care for HFrEF. The findings support the persistence of many challenges and also sheds light on new challenges. New challenges identified include conflicting perspectives between generalists and specialists, hesitancy to prescribe newer medications due to safety concerns, and unintended consequences related to value-based reimbursement metrics for select medications.

Palliative Care across Settings: Perspectives from Inpatient, Primary Care, and Home Health Care Providers and Staff.

BACKGROUND: Early introduction of palliative care can improve patient-centered outcomes for older adults with complex medical conditions. However, identifying the need for and introducing palliative care with patients and caregivers is often difficult. We aim to identify how and why a multi-setting approach to palliative care discussions may improve the identification of palliative care needs and how to facilitate these conversations. METHODS: Descriptive qualitative study to inform the development and future pilot testing of a model to improve recognition of, and support for, unmet palliative care needs in home health care (HHC). Thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with providers across inpatient (n = 11), primary care (n = 17), and HHC settings (n = 10). RESULTS: Four key themes emerged: 1) providers across settings can identify palliative care needs using their unique perspectives of the patient's care, 2) identifying palliative care needs is challenging due to infrequent communication and lack of shared information between providers, 3) importance of identifying a clinical lead of patient care who will direct palliative care discussions (primary care provider), and 4) importance of identifying a care coordination lead (HHC) to bridge communication among multi-setting providers. These themes highlight a multi-setting approach that would improve the frequency and quality of palliative care discussions. CONCLUSIONS: A lack of structured communication across settings is a major barrier to introducing and providing palliative care. A novel model that improves communication and coordination of palliative care across HHC, inpatient and primary care providers may facilitate identifying and addressing palliative care needs in medically complex older adults.

Pilot Trial of a Social Work Intervention to Provide Palliative Care for Adults with Cancer in Skilled Nursing Facilities.

Background: Hospitalized patients with cancer and their caregivers discharged to skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) have unmet palliative care needs. Objective: To determine feasibility and acceptability of Assessing and Listening to Individual Goals and Needs (ALIGN), a palliative care social worker (PCSW) intervention, for older adults and their caregivers in SNFs. Design: Single-arm, single-site pilot study. Predefined feasibility goals were >70% intervention completion and study retention rates (postintervention outcomes completed at one week). Setting/Subjects: Twenty-three patients with cancer and their 21 caregivers discharged to 12 SNFs posthospitalization. Measurements: Primary outcomes were feasibility and acceptability. Exploratory patient and caregiver-reported outcomes, including goals of care were collected at baseline and one week postintervention. Health care utilization, mortality, and hospice utilization was collected at the six-month follow-up. Results: Of 73 patients screened, 35 (48%) were eligible and 23 (66%) patients and 21 caregivers enrolled. Eighteen (78%) patients completed the intervention and 10 (44%) patients and 13 (62%) caregivers provided follow-up outcomes. Average age of patients was 73, and 19 (83%) had stage III or IV cancer. Average age of caregivers was 55. Eight (44%) patients' preferences changed to prefer less aggressive care. Nineteen (83%) patients died during or shortly after intervention completion. Qualitative feedback from participant and SNF staff interviews supported high acceptability. PCSW involvement increased illness understanding and patient engagement with advance care planning. SNF staff valued increased palliative support. Conclusions: Intervention completion was >70%, however, not study retention due to higher-than-expected mortality. Future study should account for high mortality and examine whether ALIGN can better prepare surrogate decision makers and enhance the ability of SNFs to address changing goals of care. Clinical Trial Registration Number NCT04882111.

Identifying factors that contribute to burnout and resilience among hospital-based addiction medicine providers: A qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Inpatient Addiction Consultation Services (ACS) fill an important need by connecting hospitalized patients with substance use disorders with resources for treatment; however, providers of these services may be at risk for burnout. In this qualitative study, we aimed to identify factors associated with burnout and, conversely, resilience among multidisciplinary providers working on ACS. METHODS: We completed 26 semi-structured interviews with clinicians working on ACS, including physicians, social workers, and advanced practice providers. Twelve institutions across the country were represented. The study recruited participants via email solicitation to ACS directors and then via snowball sampling. We used an inductive, grounded theory approach to analyze data. RESULTS: Providers described factors contributing to burnout and strategies for promoting resilience, and three main themes arose: (1) Systemic barriers contributed to provider burnout, (2) Engaging in meaningful work increased resilience, and (3) Team dynamics influenced perceptions of burnout and resilience. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that hospital-based addiction medicine work is intrinsically rewarding for many providers and that engaging with other addiction providers to debrief challenging encounters or engage in advocacy work can be protective against burnout. However, administrative and systemic factors are frequent sources of frustration for providers of ACS. Structured debriefings may help to mitigate burnout. Furthermore, training to enhance providers' ability to engage effectively in advocacy work within and between hospital systems has the potential to promote resilience and protect against burnout among ACS providers.

"These Are Our Kids": Qualitative Interviews With Clinical Leaders in General Emergency Departments on Motivations, Processes, and Guidelines in Pediatric Sepsis Care.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Sepsis is a leading cause of pediatric death requiring emergency resuscitation. Most children with sepsis are treated in general emergency departments (EDs); however, research has focused on pediatric EDs. We sought to identify barriers and facilitators to pediatric sepsis care in general EDs, including care processes, the role of guidelines, and incentivized metrics. METHODS: In this qualitative study, we conducted semistructured interviews with key informant physician and nurse leaders overseeing pediatric sepsis in general EDs in 2021, including medical directors, nurse managers, and quality coordinators. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded using deductive domains based on steps of sepsis care, pediatric readiness, and structural dynamics. Domains were analyzed across interviews in matrices, using thematic analysis within domains. RESULTS: Twenty-one clinical leaders representing 26 hospitals, including trauma levels I to IV, were interviewed. The themes included the following: (1) motivation to improve pediatric sepsis care based on moral imperative and location; (2) need for actionable pediatric sepsis guidelines; (3) children's hospitals' role in education, protocols, transfer, and consultation; and (4) mixed feelings about reportable metrics, particularly in EDs with low pediatric volume. Sepsis care process challenges included diagnosis, intravenous access, and antibiotic delivery but varied among hospitals. CONCLUSION: Leaders in general EDs were motivated to provide high-quality pediatric sepsis care but disagreed on whether reportable metrics would drive improvements. They universally sought direct support from their nearest children's hospitals and actionable guidelines. Efforts to address pediatric sepsis quality in general EDs should prioritize guideline design, responsive pediatric transfer and consultation systems, and locally specific process improvement.