Prognosis Communication in Heart Failure: Experiences and Preferences of End-Stage Heart Failure Patients and Care Partners.

BACKGROUND: Patients with heart failure (HF) overestimate survival compared with model-predicted estimates, but the reasons for this discrepancy are poorly understood. We characterized how patients with end-stage HF and their care partners understand prognosis and elicited their preferences around prognosis communication. METHODS: We conducted in-depth, semistructured interviews with patients with end-stage HF and their care partners between 2021 and 2022 at a tertiary care center in Michigan. Participants were asked to describe barriers they faced to understanding prognosis. All interviews were coded and analyzed using an iterative content analysis approach. RESULTS: Fifteen patients with end-stage HF and 15 care partners participated, including 7 dyads. The median patient age was 66.5 years (range, 31-80) and included 9 of 15 (60%) White participants and 9 of 15 (60%) were males. Care partners included 10 of 15 (67%) White participants and 6 of 15 (40%) were males. Care partners were partners (n=7, 47%), siblings (n=4, 27%), parents (n=2, 13%), and children (n=2, 13%). Most patients demonstrated a poor understanding of their prognosis. In contrast, care partners commonly identified the patient's rapidly declining trajectory. Patients and care partners described ineffective prognosis communication with clinicians, common barriers to understanding prognosis, and similar suggestions on improving prognosis communication. Barriers to understanding prognosis included (1) conversation avoidance by physicians, (2) information inconsistency across different physicians, (3) distractions during prognosis communication due to emphasis on other conditions, and (4) confusion related to the use of medical jargon. Most patients and care partners wanted discussions around prognosis to begin early in the course of the disease, repeated routinely using layperson's terms, incorporating both quality of life and survival assessments, and involving care partners. Both patients and care partners did not expect precise survival estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with end-stage HF demonstrate a poor understanding of their prognosis compared with their care partners. Patients and care partners are open to discussing prognosis early, using direct and patient-centered language.

Achieving goal-concordant care: Formal and informal advance care planning for White, Black, and Hispanic older adults.

INTRODUCTION: Advance care planning (ACP) aims to ensure that patients receive goal-concordant care (GCC), which is especially important for racially or ethnically minoritized populations at greater risk of poor end-of-life outcomes. However, few studies have evaluated the impact of advance directives (i.e., formal ACP) or goals-of-care conversations (i.e., informal ACP) on such care. This study aimed to examine the relationship between each of formal and informal ACP and goal-concordant end-of-life care among older Americans and to determine whether their impact differed between individuals identified as White, Black, or Hispanic. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using 2012-2018 data from the biennial Health and Retirement Study. We examined the relationships of interest using two, separate multivariable logistic regression models. Model 1 regressed a proxy report of GCC on formal and informal ACP and sociodemographic and health-related covariates. Model 2 added interaction terms between race/ethnicity and the two types of ACP. RESULTS: Our sample included 2048 older adults. There were differences in the proportions of White, Black, and Hispanic decedents who received GCC (83.1%, 75.3%, and 71.3%, respectively, p < 0.001) and in the use of each type of ACP by racial/ethnic group. In model 1, informal compared with no informal ACP was associated with higher odds of GCC (adjusted odds ratio = 1.38 [95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.82]). In model 2, Black decedents who had formal ACP were more likely to receive GCC than those who did not, but there were no statistically significant differences between decedents of different racial/ethnic groups who had no ACP, informal ACP only, or both types of ACP. CONCLUSIONS: Our results build on previous work by indicating the importance of incorporating goals-of-care conversations into routine healthcare for older adults and encouraging ACP usage among racially and ethnically minoritized populations who use ACP tools at lower rates.

Clinician Perceptions of Barriers and Facilitators for Delivering Early Integrated Palliative Care via Telehealth.

Early integrated palliative care (EIPC) significantly improves clinical outcomes for patients with advanced cancer. Telehealth may be a useful tool to deliver EIPC sustainably and equitably. Palliative care clinicians completed a survey regarding their perceptions of the barriers, facilitators, and benefits of using telehealth video visits for delivering EIPC for patients with advanced lung cancer. Forty-eight clinicians across 22 cancer centers completed the survey between May and July 2022. Most (91.7%) agreed that telehealth increases access to EIPC and simplifies the process for patients to receive EIPC (79.2%). Clinicians noted that the elderly, those in rural areas, and those with less-resourced backgrounds have greater difficulty using telehealth. Perceived barriers were largely patient-based factors, including technological literacy, internet and device availability, and patient preferences. Clinicians agreed that several organizational factors facilitated telehealth EIPC delivery, including technological infrastructure (85.4%), training (83.3%), and support from study coordinators (81.3%). Other barriers included systems-based factors, such as insurance reimbursement and out-of-state coverage restrictions. Patient-, organization-, and systems-based factors are all important to providing and improving access to telehealth EIPC services. Further research is needed to investigate the efficacy of telehealth EIPC and how policies and interventions may improve access to and dissemination of this care modality.

Should Buprenorphine Be Considered a First-Line Opioid for the Treatment of Moderate to Severe Cancer Pain?

Cancer pain remains a significant problem worldwide, affecting more than half of patients receiving anti-cancer treatment and most patients with advanced disease. Opioids remain the cornerstone of therapy, and morphine, given its availability, multiple formulations, price, and evidence base, is typically considered the first-line treatment for moderate to severe cancer pain. Buprenorphine has emerged in recent decades as an alternative opioid for treating chronic pain and substance use disorder (SUD). However, it remains controversial whether buprenorphine should be considered a first-line opioid for moderate to severe cancer pain. In this "Controversies in Palliative Care" article, three expert clinicians independently answer this question. Specifically, each group provides a synopsis of the key studies that inform their thought process, share practical advice on their clinical approach, and highlight the opportunities for future research. All three groups agree that there is a place for the use of buprenorphine as a first-line opioid in cancer pain. Specifically, they mention populations of elderly patients, patients with renal failure, and those with (SUD). They also underscore many unique and favorable characteristics of buprenorphine, such as the low risk for respiratory depression, lack of adverse effects on testosterone levels in men, no risk of serotonin syndrome when combined with antidepressants, and ease of use given its transdermal, transmucosal, and sublingual formulations. However, further studies are needed to guide the use of buprenorphine for cancer pain-primarily randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing buprenorphine with other opioids in various pain syndromes.

Do Not Attempt Resuscitation Order Rates in Hospitalized Patients With Heart Failure, Acute Myocardial Infarction, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, and Pneumonia.

Background Descriptions of do not attempt resuscitation (DNAR) orders in heart failure (HF) are limited. We describe use of DNAR orders in HF hospitalizations relative to other common conditions, focusing on race. Methods and Results This was a retrospective study of all adult hospitalizations for HF, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and pneumonia from 2010 to 2016 using the California State Inpatient Dataset. Using a hierarchical multivariable logistic regression model with random effects for the hospital, we identified factors associated with DNAR orders for each condition. For racial variation, hospitals were divided into quintiles based on proportion of Black patients cared for. Our cohort comprised 399 816 HF, 190 802 AMI, 192 640 COPD, and 269 262 pneumonia hospitalizations. DNAR orders were most prevalent in HF (11.9%), followed by pneumonia (11.1%), COPD (7.9%), and AMI (7.1%). Prevalence of DNAR orders did not change from 2010 to 2016 for each condition. For all conditions, DNAR orders were more common in elderly people, women, and White people with significant site-level variation across 472 hospitals. For HF and COPD, hospitalizations at sites that cared for a higher proportion of Black patients were less likely associated with DNAR orders. For AMI and pneumonia, conditions such as dementia and malignancy were strongly associated with DNAR orders. Conclusions DNAR orders were present in 12% of HF hospitalizations, similar to pneumonia but higher than AMI and COPD. For HF, we noted significant variability across sites when stratified by proportion of Black patients cared for, suggesting geographic and racial differences in end-of-life care.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Informal and Formal Advance Care Planning Among U.S. Older Adults.

OBJECTIVE: To examine advance care planning (ACP) trends among an increasingly diverse aging population, we compared informal and formal ACP use by race/ethnicity among U.S. older adults (≤65 years). METHODS: We used Health and Retirement Study data (2012-2018) to assess relationships between race/ethnicity and ACP type (i.e., no ACP, informal ACP only, formal ACP only, or both ACP types). We reported adjusted risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic respondents were 1.77 (1.60, 1.96) and 1.76 (1.55, 1.99) times as likely, respectively, to report no ACP compared to non-Hispanic White respondents. Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic respondents were 0.74 (0.71, 0.78) and 0.74 (0.69, 0.80) times as likely, respectively, to report using both ACP types as non-Hispanic White respondents. DISCUSSION: Racial/ethnic differences in ACP persist after controlling for a variety of barriers to and facilitators of ACP which may contribute to disparities in end-of-life care.

Bad company: Loneliness longitudinally predicts the symptom cluster of pain, fatigue, and depression in older adults.

BACKGROUND: Pain, fatigue, and depression frequently co-occur as a symptom cluster. While commonly occurring in those with cancer and autoimmune disease, the cluster is also found in the absence of systemic illness or inflammation. Loneliness is a common psychosocial stressor associated with the cluster cross-sectionally. We investigated whether loneliness predicted the development of pain, fatigue, depression, and the symptom cluster over time. METHODS: Data from the Health and Retirement Study were used. We included self-respondents ≥50 year-old who had at least two measurements of loneliness and the symptom cluster from 2006-2016 (n = 5974). Time-varying loneliness was used to predict pain, fatigue, depression, and the symptom cluster in the subsequent wave(s) using generalized estimating equations (GEE) and adjusting for sociodemographic covariates, living arrangement, and the presence of the symptom(s) at baseline. RESULTS: Loneliness increased the odds of subsequently reporting pain (aOR 1.22, 95% CI 1.08, 1.37), fatigue (aOR 1.47, 95% CI 1.32, 1.65), depression (aOR 2.33, 95% CI 2.02, 2.68), as well as the symptom cluster (aOR 2.15, 95% CI 1.74, 2.67). The median time between the baseline and final follow-up measurement was 7.6 years (IQR 4.1, 8.2). CONCLUSIONS: Loneliness strongly predicts the development of pain, fatigue, and depression as well as the cluster of all three symptoms several years later in a large, nonclinical sample of older American adults. Future studies should examine the multiple pathways through which loneliness may produce this cluster, as well as examine whether other psychosocial stressors also increase risk. It is possible that interventions which address loneliness in older adults may prevent or mitigate the cluster of pain, fatigue, and depression.

Functional and Cognitive Decline Among Older Adults After High-risk Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether older adults are at higher risk of lasting functional and cognitive decline after surgery, and the impact of decline on survival and healthcare use. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Patient-centered outcomes after surgery are poorly characterized. METHODS: Using data from the Health and Retirement Study linked with Medicare, we matched older adults (≥65 years) who underwent one of 163 high-risk elective operations (ie, inpatient mortality of ≥1%) with nonsurgical controls between 1992 and 2012. Functional decline was defined as an increase in the number of activities of daily living (ADLs) and/or instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs) requiring assistance from baseline. Cognitive decline was defined by worse response to a test of memory and mental processing from baseline. Using logistic regression, we examined whether surgery was associated with functional and cognitive decline, and whether declines were associated with poorer survival and increased healthcare use. RESULTS: The matched cohort of patients who did not undergo surgery consisted of 3591 (75%) participants compared to 1197 (25%) who underwent surgery. Patients who underwent surgery were at higher risk of functional and cognitive declines [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.52, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.23-1.87 and aOR 1.32, 95% CI: 1.03-1.71]. Declines were associated with poorer long-term survival [hazard ratio (HR) 1.67, 95% CI: 1.43-1.94 and HR 1.35, 95% CI: 1.15-1.58], and were significantly associated with nearly all measures of increased healthcare utilization (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Older adults undergoing high-risk surgery are at increased risk of developing lasting functional and cognitive declines.

Evaluation of Buprenorphine Rotation in Patients Receiving Long-term Opioids for Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Individuals with chronic pain who use long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) are at risk of opioid use disorder and other harmful outcomes. Rotation to buprenorphine may be considered, but the outcomes of such rotation in this population have not been systematically reviewed. Objective: To synthesize the evidence on rotation to buprenorphine from full µ-opioid receptor agonists among individuals with chronic pain who were receiving LTOT, including the outcomes of precipitated opioid withdrawal, pain intensity, pain interference, treatment success, adverse events or adverse effects, mental health condition, and health care use. Evidence Review: PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, and PsycInfo were searched from inception through November 3, 2020, for peer-reviewed original English-language research that reported the prespecified outcomes of rotation from prescribed long-term opioids to buprenorphine among individuals with chronic pain. Two independent reviewers extracted data as well as assessed risk of bias and study quality according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. Quality of evidence was assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Findings: A total of 22 studies were analyzed, of which 5 (22.7%) were randomized clinical trials, 7 (31.8%) were case-control or cohort studies, and 10 (45.5%) were uncontrolled pre-post studies, which involved 1616 unique participants (675 female [41.8%] and 941 male [58.2%] individuals). Six of the 22 studies (27.3%) were primary or secondary analyses of a large randomized clinical trial. Participants had diverse pain and opioid use histories. Rationale for buprenorphine rotation included inadequate analgesia, intolerable adverse effects, risky opioid regimens (eg, high dose and/or sedative coprescriptions), and aberrant opioid use. Most protocols were adapted from protocols for initiating treatment in patients with opioid use disorder and used buccal or sublingual buprenorphine. Very low-quality evidence suggested that buprenorphine rotation was associated with maintained or improved analgesia, with a low risk of precipitating opioid withdrawal. Steady-dose buprenorphine was better tolerated than tapered-dose buprenorphine. Adverse effects were manageable, and severe adverse events were rare. Only 2 studies evaluated mental health outcomes, but none evaluated health care use. Limitations included a high risk of bias in most studies. Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review, buprenorphine was associated with reduced chronic pain intensity without precipitating opioid withdrawal in individuals with chronic pain who were receiving LTOT. Future studies are necessary to ascertain the ideal starting dose, formulation, and administration frequency of buprenorphine as well as the best approach to buprenorphine rotation.

Unwelcome Companions: Loneliness Associates with the Cluster of Pain, Fatigue, and Depression in Older Adults.

Objective: Pain, fatigue, and depression commonly co-occur as a symptom cluster in pathological inflammatory states. Psychosocial stressors such as loneliness may lead to similar states through shared mechanisms. We investigated the association of loneliness with pain, fatigue, and depression in older adults. Methods: Using Health and Retirement Study data (N = 11,766), we measured cross-sectional prevalence of frequent, moderate to severe pain; severe fatigue; depressive symptoms; and co-occurrence of symptoms surpassing threshold levels (i.e., symptom cluster). Logistic regression models evaluated associations with loneliness. Results: Pain, fatigue, and depression were reported in 19.2%, 20.0%, and 15.3% of the total sample, respectively. The symptom cluster was seen in 4.9% overall; prevalence in lonely individuals was significantly increased (11.6% vs. 2.3%, p < .0001). After adjusting for demographic variables, loneliness associated with the symptom cluster (adjusted OR = 3.39, 95% CI = 2.91, 3.95) and each symptom (pain adjusted OR = 1.61, 95% CI = 1.48, 1.76; fatigue adjusted OR = 2.02, 95% CI = 1.85, 2.20; depression adjusted OR = 4.34, 95% CI = 3.93, 4.79). Discussion: Loneliness strongly associates with the symptom cluster of pain, fatigue, and depression. Further research should examine causal relationships and investigate whether interventions targeting loneliness mitigate pain, fatigue, and depression.

How Patients and Providers Weigh the Risks and Benefits of Long-Term Opioid Therapy for Cancer Pain.

PURPOSE: To understand how patients and providers weigh the risks and benefits of long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for cancer pain. METHODS: Researchers used VA approved audio-recording devices to record interviews. ATLAS t.i., a qualitative analysis software, was used for analysis of transcribed interview data. Participants included 20 Veteran patients and 20 interdisciplinary providers from primary care- and oncology-based practice settings. We conducted semistructured interviews and analyzed transcripts used thematic qualitative methods. Interviews explored factors that affect decision making about appropriateness of LTOT for cancer related pain. We saturated themes for providers and patients separately. RESULTS: Factors affecting patient decision-making included influence from various information sources, persuasion from trusted providers, and sometimes deferral of the decision to their provider. Relative prioritization of pain management as the focal patient concern varied with some patients describing comparatively more fear of chemotherapy than opioid analgesics, comparatively more knowledge of opioids in relation to other drugs;patients expressed a preference to spend the limited time they have with their oncologist discussing cancer treatment rather than opioid use. Factors affecting provider decision making included prognosis, patient goals, patient characteristics, and provider experience and biases. Providers differed in how they weigh the relative importance of alleviating pain or avoiding opioids in the face of treating patients with cancer and histories of substance abuse. CONCLUSION: Divergent perspectives on factors need to be considered when weighing risks and benefits. Policies and interventions should be designed to reduce variation in practice to promote equal access to adequate pain management. Improved shared decision-making initiatives will take advantage of patient decision-making factors and priorities.

Palliative Care for Older Adults with Multimorbidity in the Time of COVID 19.

Older adults with multimorbidity face difficulty accessing healthcare in the COVID era. Palliative care referral may be appropriate to provide additional support for symptoms, advance care planning, or caregiver distress. Since COVID, many palliative care providers have become more accessible through telehealth; however, older adults may have challenges with technology and require caregiver involvement to use. In the inpatient setting, palliative consult teams have assumed a greater role in daily communication with families who cannot visit the patient and in providing emotional support to front-line colleagues. Busy primary clinicians have embraced these efforts, but challenges remain to sustaining these changes.

Surgery Residents' Experiences With Seriously-Ill and Dying Patients: An Opportunity to Improve Palliative and End-of-Life Care.

OBJECTIVE: To describe how and when surgery residents provided primary palliative care and engaged specialty palliative care services. DESIGN: Phase I consisted of a previously validated survey instrument supplemented with additional questions. We then conducted semistructured interviews with a subset of the survey respondents (Phase II). Using thematic analysis, we characterized surgery residents' perceptions of palliative care delivery among surgical patients. SETTING: General surgery residency programs across the state of Michigan. PARTICIPANTS: General surgery residents across the state of Michigan. All residents in participating programs were invited to complete the survey in Phase I. Phase II consisted of a subset of the survey respondents who underwent semistructured interviews. Interview respondents were sampled to reflect the overall surveyed group. RESULTS: Among 119 survey respondents (response rate 70%), all had encountered a palliative care specialist but only 58.8% had been taught when to consult or to refer to palliative care. Survey respondents reported on a multitude of barriers within the clinician, patient and family, and systemic domains. Interviews expanded on survey findings and 4 influential factors of palliative care delivery emerged: (1) Resident Education and Training; (2) Resident Attitudes Toward Palliative Care; (3) Knowledge of Palliative Care; and (4) Training within a Surgical Culture. CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals how surgery resident training and experiences impact palliative and end-of-life care for surgical patients at teaching institutions. Knowledge of how and when residents are providing primary palliative care and engaging with palliative care services will inform future knowledge and behavioral interventions for trainees who often provide care for patients nearing the end of life.

Comparing Methadone Rotation to Consensus Opinion.

CONTEXT: Methadone is a complex but useful medication for pain management in palliative care. Recent expert opinions have been published on the safe and effective use of methadone. OBJECTIVES: To determine the success of methadone rotations and evaluate concordance with consensus recommendations by a palliative care consult service. METHODS: A retrospective study of methadone rotation practice by a palliative care consult service and outcomes for patients hospitalized between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2018 at a single academic medical center. A successful rotation was defined as a 30% reduction in pain or as-needed medication use sustained for at least three consecutive days. Patient outcomes were compared with expert consensus recommendations. RESULTS: About 59 patients met the inclusion criteria. The study population was mostly Caucasian men and women of equal proportions who were started on methadone for inadequate pain control. Sixty-eight percent of patients were successfully rotated. Subjects who were rotated using a standardized protocol were six times more likely to have a successful rotation (odds ratio 6.28 [1.25-30.92]; P = 0.0238). CONCLUSION: The utilization of a standardized protocol was associated with better patient outcomes.

Signature Informed Consent for Long-Term Opioid Therapy in Patients With Cancer: Perspectives of Patients and Providers.

CONTEXT: Signature informed consent (SIC) is a part of a Veterans Health Administration ethics initiative for patient education and shared decision making with long-term opioid therapy (LTOT). Historically, patients with cancer-related pain receiving LTOT are exempt from this process. OBJECTIVES: Our objective is to understand patients' and providers' perspectives on using SIC for LTOT in patients with cancer-related pain. METHODS: Semistructured interviews with 20 opioid prescribers and 20 patients who were prescribed opioids at two large academically affiliated Veterans Health Administration Medical Centers. We used a combination of deductive and inductive approaches in content analysis to produce emergent themes. RESULTS: Potential advantages of SIC are that it can clarify and help patients comprehend LTOT risks and benefits, provide clear upfront boundaries and expectations, and involve the patient in shared decision making. Potential disadvantages of SIC include time delay to treatment, discouragement from recommended opioid use, and impaired trust in the patient-provider relationship. Providers and patients have misconceptions about the definition of SIC. Providers and patients question if SIC for LTOT is really informed consent. Providers and patients advocate for strategies to improve comprehension of SIC content. Providers had divergent perspectives on exemptions from SIC. Oncologists want SIC for LTOT to be tailored for patients with cancer. CONCLUSION: Provider and patient interviews highlight various aspects about the advantages and disadvantages of requiring SIC for LTOT in cancer-related pain. Tailoring SIC for LTOT to be specific to cancer-related concerns and to have an appropriate literacy level are important considerations.

Delays in Palliative Care Referral Among Surgical Patients: Perspectives of Surgical Residents Across the State of Michigan.

CONTEXT: Palliative care services (PCS) are underutilized and frequently delayed among surgical patients. Surgical residents often serve at the forefront for patient issues, including conducting conversations regarding prognosis and goals of care. OBJECTIVES: This qualitative study identifies critical barriers to palliative care referral among seriously ill surgical patients from the perspective of surgical residents. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with surgical residents (n = 18) across the state of Michigan, which focused on experiences with seriously ill surgical patients and PCS. Inductive thematic analysis was used to establish themes based on the research objectives and data collected. RESULTS: Four dominant themes of resident-perceived barriers to palliative care referral were identified: 1) challenges with prognostication, 2) communication barriers, 3) respect for the surgical hierarchy, and 4) surgeon mentality. Residents consistently expressed challenges in predicting patient outcomes, and verbalizing this to both attendings and families augmented this uncertainty in seeking PCS. Communicative challenges included managing discordant provider opinions and the stigma associated with PCS. Finally, residents perceived that an attending surgeon's decisive authority and mentality negatively influenced the delivery of PCS. CONCLUSIONS: Among resident trainees, unpredictable patient outcomes led to uncertainty in the timing and appropriateness of palliative care referral and further complicated communicating plans of care. Residents perceived and relied on the attending surgeon as the ultimate decision maker, wherein the surgeon's sense of responsibility to the patient was identified as a significant barrier to PCS referral. Further studies are needed to test surgeon-specific interventions to improve access to and delivery of PCS.

Surgeon Perspectives Regarding Death and Dying.

BACKGROUND: Surgical patients most commonly receive palliative care services within 24-48 hours of death, and reasons for this delay are poorly understood. Research with nonsurgeons suggests that physician characteristics and beliefs about death and dying may contribute to late referral. OBJECTIVE: To describe surgeon perspectives related to death and dying, and their relationship with delayed referrals to palliative care. DESIGN: Using a previously validated survey instrument supplemented by open-ended questions, deductive content analysis was used to describe surgeon preferences for end-of-life care. SETTINGS: Participants were all current nonretired members of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Surgeon descriptions of a "good death" and how personal experiences influence care provided. RESULTS: Among 131 survey respondents (response rate 16.5%), 117 (89.3%) completed all or part of the qualitative portion of the survey. Respondents consistently reported their personal preferences for end-of-life care, and four central themes emerged: (1) pain and symptom management, (2) clear decision making, (3) avoidance of medical care, and (4) completion. Surgeons also reflected on both good and bad experiences with patients and family members dying, and how these experiences impact practice. LIMITATIONS: The small sample size inherent to Internet surveys may limit generalizability and contribute to selection bias. CONCLUSION: This study reveals surgeon preferences for end-of-life care, which may inform initiatives aimed at surgeons who may underuse or delay palliative care services. Future studies are needed to better understand how surgeon preferences may directly impact treatment recommendations for their patients.

Surgeons' Perceived Barriers to Palliative and End-of-Life Care: A Mixed Methods Study of a Surgical Society.

BACKGROUND: Nearly 20% of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients present with potentially incurable (Stage IV) disease, yet their physicians do not integrate cancer treatment with palliative care. Compared with patients treated by primary providers, surgical patients with terminal diseases are significantly less likely to receive palliative or end-of-life care. OBJECTIVE: To describe surgeon perspectives on palliative and end-of-life care for patients with Stage IV CRCs. DESIGN: This is a convergent mixed methods study using a validated survey instrument from the Critical Care Peer Workgroup of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's Promoting Excellence in End-of-Life Care Project with additional qualitative questions. SETTINGS: Participants were all current, nonretired members of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Surgeon-perceived barriers to palliative and end-of-life care for patients with Stage IV CRCs were identified. RESULTS: Among 131 Internet survey respondents (response rate 16.5%), 76.1% reported no formal education in palliative care, and specifically noted inadequate training in techniques to forgo life-sustaining measures (37.9%) and communication (42.7%). Over half (61.8%) of surgeons cited unrealistic expectations among patients and families as a barrier to care, which also limited discussion of palliation. At the system level, absence of documentation, appropriate processes, and culture hindered the initiation of palliative care. Thematic analysis of open-ended questions confirmed and extended these findings through the following major barriers to palliative and end-of-life care: (1) surgeon knowledge and training; (2) communication challenges; (3) difficulty with prognostication; (4) patient and family factors encompassing unrealistic expectations and discordant preferences; and (5) systemic issues including culture and lack of documentation and appropriate resources. LIMITATIONS: Generalizability is limited by the small sample size inherent to Internet surveys, which may contribute to selection bias. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons valued palliative and end-of-life care but reported multilevel barriers to its provision. These data will inform strategies to reduce these perceived barriers.