A New Approach to the Identification of Palliative Care Needs and Advanced Chronic Patients among Nursing Home Residents.

BACKGROUND: Proper planning of Palliative Care in nursing homes requires advanced knowledge of the care needs that residents show. The aim of the study was to evaluate Palliative Needs and other conditions such as fragility, complexity, and prognosis and also to suggest new indicators for the establishment of the resident's advanced chronic condition. METHODS: Cross-sectional study conducted in 149 nursing homes Complex Chronic residents evaluated by trained professionals. Palliative Care Needs, assessed by the NECPAL ICO-CCOMS© tool, and fragility, case and palliative complexity and prognosis were evaluate through a comprehensive assessment. Descriptive analyses and association measures were performed setting the statistical significance at 0.05. RESULTS: More than 50% of the residents had positive Surprise Question and other Palliative Needs and were classified as Advanced Chronic Patients. Distress and/or Severe Adaptative Disorder was the most frequent need shown by the residents and significant differences in levels of frailty and other characteristics, were found between the Positive and the Negative Surprise Question Groups. Statistically significant correlations were also found between aspects of both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Nursing homes residents show Palliative Needs regardless of the response to the Surprise Question of the NECPAL tool. Other characteristics such as presence of an intermediate level of frailty are suggested as a new perspective to identify advanced chronic patients among nursing homes residents.

Frailty, Complexity, and Priorities in the Use of Advanced Palliative Care Resources in Nursing Homes.

Background and objectives: This study aimed to determine the frailty, prognosis, complexity, and palliative care complexity of nursing home residents with palliative care needs and define the characteristics of the cases eligible for receiving advanced palliative care according to the resources available at each nursing home. Materials and Methods: In this multi-centre, descriptive, and cross-sectional study, trained nurses from eight nursing homes in southern Spain selected 149 residents with palliative care needs. The following instruments were used: the Frail-VIG index, the case complexity index (CCI), the Diagnostic Instrument of Complexity in Palliative Care (IDC-Pal), the palliative prognosis index, the Barthel index (dependency), Pfeiffer's test (cognitive impairment), and the Charlson comorbidity index. A consensus was reached on the complexity criteria of the Diagnostic Instrument of Complexity in Palliative Care that could be addressed in the nursing home (no priority) and those that required a one-off (priority 2) or full (priority 1) intervention of advanced palliative care resources. Non-parametric tests were used to compare non-priority patients and patients with some kind of priority. Results: A high percentage of residents presented frailty (80.6%), clinical complexity (80.5%), and palliative care complexity (65.8%). A lower percentage of residents had a poor prognosis (10.1%) and an extremely poor prognosis (2%). Twelve priority 1 and 14 priority 2 elements were identified as not matching the palliative care complexity elements that had been previously identified. Of the studied cases, 20.1% had priority 1 status and 38.3% had priority 2 status. Residents with some kind of priority had greater levels of dependency (p < 0.001), cognitive impairment (p < 0.001), and poorer prognoses (p < 0.001). Priority 1 patients exhibited higher rates of refractory delirium (p = 0.003), skin ulcers (p = 0.041), and dyspnoea (p = 0.020). Conclusions: The results indicate that there are high levels of frailty, clinical complexity, and palliative care complexity in nursing homes. The resources available at each nursing home must be considered to determine when advanced palliative care resources are required.

Prospective Evaluation of Intensity of Symptoms, Therapeutic Procedures and Treatment in Palliative Care Patients in Nursing Homes.

The aim of the study is to evaluate the intensity of symptoms, and any treatment and therapeutic procedures received by advanced chronic patients in nursing homes. A multi-centre prospective study was conducted in six nursing homes for five months. A nurse trainer selected palliative care patients from whom the sample was randomly selected for inclusion. The Edmonton Symptoms Assessment Scale, therapeutic procedures, and treatment were evaluated. Parametric and non-parametric tests were used to evaluate month-to-month differences and differences between those who died and those who did not. A total of 107 residents were evaluated. At the end of the follow-up, 39 had (34.6%) died. All symptoms (p < 0.050) increased in intensity in the last week of life. Symptoms were more intense in those who had died at follow-up (p < 0.05). The use of aerosol sprays (p = 0.008), oxygen therapy (p < 0.001), opioids (p < 0.001), antibiotics (p = 0.004), and bronchodilators (p = 0.003) increased in the last week of life. Peripheral venous catheters (p = 0.022), corticoids (p = 0.007), antiemetics (p < 0.001), and antidepressants (p < 0.05) were used more in the patients who died. In conclusion, the use of therapeutic procedures (such as urinary catheters, peripheral venous catheter placement, and enteral feeding) and drugs (such as antibiotics, anxiolytics, and new antidepressant prescriptions) should be carefully considered in this clinical setting.

Prognostic Models Associated with 6-Month Survival of Patients Admitted to Nursing Homes.

BACKGROUND: Health status and the needs presented by people admitted to nursing homes make it necessary to contemplate aspects such as prognosis to offer quality palliative care. OBJECTIVE: To compare the prognostic utility in nursing homes of two prognostic models of 6-month survival based on the Palliative Prognostic Index (PPI) or Palliative Performance Status (PPS) instruments and palliative needs indicators. METHODS: A longitudinal prospective observational and analytical cohort study of survival and prognostic models in 88 patients with palliative needs (assessed by the NECPAL-ICO-CCOMS©) from an Andalusian (Spain) nursing home was performed. Sociodemographic and clinical variables were assessed, and 6 months later, in September 2017, survival was checked. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed using the R-Commander program (version 3.2.2). RESULTS: Two models of the logistic regression analysis met the fit criteria. The two models combined the Surprise Question, the presence of persistent symptoms, and the clinical indicators of severity from the NECPAL tool, in addition to the Charlson Comorbidity Index, and varied only in terms of the latter variable, including the PPI in the first model and the PPS in the second. In the first model, significant associations were identified between 6-month survival and the persistent symptoms variable (OR = 7.78, p = 0.025, 95% CI = 1.45-60.92) and PPI (OR = 1.94, p < 0.001, 95% CI = 1.21). In the second model, 6-month survival was also significantly associated with the persistent symptoms variable (OR = 4.57, p = 0.045, 95% CI = 1.07-22.41) and the PPS (OR = 0.93, p = 0.001, 95% CI = 0.88-0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Prognostic models such as ours that include variables commonly included in clinical assessments can help nursing home professionals prioritize and ensure adequate mobilization of palliative care resources, which are very limited in these institutions.