Trajectories of Palliative Care Needs in the ICU and Long-Term Psychological Distress Symptoms.

OBJECTIVES: While palliative care needs are assumed to improve during ICU care, few empiric data exist on need trajectories or their impact on long-term outcomes. We aimed to describe trajectories of palliative care needs during ICU care and to determine if changes in needs over 1 week was associated with similar changes in psychological distress symptoms at 3 months. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Six adult medical and surgical ICUs. PARTICIPANTS: Patients receiving mechanical ventilation for greater than or equal to 2 days and their family members. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was the 13-item Needs at the End-of-Life Screening Tool (NEST; total score range 0-130) completed by family members at baseline, 3, and 7 days. The Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), and Post-Traumatic Stress Scale (PTSS) were completed at baseline and 3 months. General linear models were used to estimate differences in distress symptoms by change in need (NEST improvement ≥ 10 points or not). One-hundred fifty-nine family members participated (median age, 54.0 yr [interquartile range (IQR), 44.0-63.0 yr], 125 [78.6%] female, 54 [34.0%] African American). At 7 days, 53 (33%) a serious level of overall need and 35 (22%) ranked greater than or equal to 1 individual need at the highest severity level. NEST scores improved greater than or equal to 10 points in only 47 (30%). Median NEST scores were 22 (IQR, 12-40) at baseline and 19 (IQR, 9-37) at 7 days (change, -2.0; IQR, -11.0 to 5.0; p = 0.12). There were no differences in PHQ-9, GAD-7, or PTSS change scores by change in NEST score (all p > 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: Serious palliative care needs were common and persistent among families during ICU care. Improvement in needs was not associated with less psychological distress at 3 months. Serious needs may be commonly underrecognized in current practice.

The Challenge of Emergency Abortion Care Following the Dobbs Ruling.

This Viewpoint discusses how limited or blocked access to legal abortion will affect the provision of emergency and critical care, including negative effects on patient health, legal intrusion into the patient-physician decision-making process, and concerns about legal jeopardy.

Palliative care phenotypes among critically ill patients and family members: intensive care unit prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Because the heterogeneity of patients in intensive care units (ICUs) and family members represents a challenge to palliative care delivery, we aimed to determine if distinct phenotypes of palliative care needs exist. METHODS: Prospective cohort study conducted among family members of adult patients undergoing mechanical ventilation in six medical and surgical ICUs. The primary outcome was palliative care need measured by the Needs at the End-of-Life Screening Tool (NEST, range from 0 (no need) to 130 (highest need)) completed 3 days after ICU admission. We also assessed quality of communication, clinician-family relationship and patient centredness of care. Latent class analysis of the NEST's 13 items was used to identify groups with similar patterns of serious palliative care needs. RESULTS: Among 257 family members, latent class analysis yielded a four-class model including complex communication needs (n=26, 10%; median NEST score 68.0), family spiritual and cultural needs (n=21, 8%; 40.0) and patient and family stress needs (n=43, 31%; 31.0), as well as a fourth group with fewer serious needs (n=167, 65%; 14.0). Interclass differences existed in quality of communication (median range 4.0-10.0, p<0.001), favourable clinician-family relationship (range 34.6%-98.2%, p<0.001) and both the patient centredness of care Eliciting Concerns (median range 4.0-5.0, p<0.001) and Decision-Making (median range 2.3-4.5, p<0.001) scales. CONCLUSIONS: Four novel phenotypes of palliative care need were identified among ICU family members with distinct differences in the severity of needs and perceived quality of the clinician-family interaction. Knowledge of need class may help to inform the development of more person-centred models of ICU-based palliative care.

Improving Outcomes Measurement in Palliative Care: The Lasting Impact of Randy Curtis and his Collaborators.

Palliative care research is deeply challenging for many reasons, not the least of which is the conceptual and operational difficulty of measuring outcomes within a seriously ill population such as critically ill patients and their family members. This manuscript describes how Randy Curtis and his network of collaborators successfully confronted some of the most vexing outcomes measurement problems in the field, and by so doing, have enhanced clinical care and research alike. Beginning with a discussion of the clinical challenges of measurement in palliative care, we then discuss a selection of the novel measures developed by Randy and his collaborators and conclude with a look toward the future evolution of these concepts. Randy and his foundational work, including both successes as well as the occasional near miss, have enriched and advanced the field as well as (immeasurably) impacted the work of so many others-including this manuscript's authors.

Assessment of Clinical Palliative Care Trigger Status vs Actual Needs Among Critically Ill Patients and Their Family Members.

Importance: Palliative care consultations in intensive care units (ICUs) are increasingly prompted by clinical characteristics associated with mortality or resource utilization. However, it is not known whether these triggers reflect actual palliative care needs. Objective: To compare unmet needs by clinical palliative care trigger status (present vs absent). Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study was conducted in 6 adult medical and surgical ICUs in academic and community hospitals in North Carolina between January 2019 and September 2020. Participants were consecutive patients receiving mechanical ventilation and their family members. Exposure: Presence of any of 9 common clinical palliative care triggers. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the Needs at the End-of-Life Screening Tool (NEST) score (range, 0-130, with higher scores reflecting greater need), which was completed after 3 days of ICU care. Trigger status performance in identifying serious need (NEST score ≥30) was assessed using sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, and C statistics. Results: Surveys were completed by 257 of 360 family members of patients (71.4% of the potentially eligible patient-family member dyads approached) with a median age of 54.0 years (IQR, 44-62 years); 197 family members (76.7%) were female, and 83 (32.3%) were Black. The median age of patients was 58.0 years (IQR, 46-68 years); 126 patients (49.0%) were female, and 88 (33.5%) were Black. There was no difference in median NEST score between participants with a trigger present (45%) and those with a trigger absent (55%) (21.0; IQR, 12.0-37.0 vs 22.5; IQR, 12.0-39.0; P = .52). Trigger presence was associated with poor sensitivity (45%; 95% CI, 34%-55%), specificity (55%; 95% CI, 48%-63%), positive likelihood ratio (1.0; 95% CI, 0.7-1.3), negative likelihood ratio (1.0; 95% CI, 0.8-1.2), and C statistic (0.50; 95% CI, 0.44-0.57). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, clinical palliative care trigger status was not associated with palliative care needs and no better than chance at identifying the most serious needs, which raises questions about an increasingly common clinical practice. Focusing care delivery on directly measured needs may represent a more person-centered alternative.

"Don't Talk to Them About Goals of Care": Understanding Disparities in Advance Care Planning.

BACKGROUND: Structurally marginalized groups experience disproportionately low rates of advance care planning (ACP). To improve equitable patient-centered end-of-life care, we examine barriers and facilitators to ACP among clinicians as they are central participants in these discussions. METHOD: In this national study, we conducted semi-structured interviews with purposively selected clinicians from 6 diverse health systems between August 2018 and June 2019. Thematic analysis yielded themes characterizing clinicians' perceptions of barriers and facilitators to ACP among patients, and patient-centered ways of overcoming them. RESULTS: Among 74 participants, 49 (66.2%) were physicians, 16.2% were nurses, and 13.5% were social workers. Most worked in primary care (35.1%), geriatrics (21.1%), and palliative care (19.3%) settings. Clinicians most frequently expressed difficulty discussing ACP with certain racial and ethnic groups (African American, Hispanic, Asian, and Native American) (31.1%), non-native English speakers (24.3%), and those with certain religious beliefs (Catholic, Orthodox Jewish, and Muslim) (13.5%). Clinicians were more likely to attribute barriers to ACP completion to patients (62.2%), than to clinicians (35.1%) or health systems (37.8%). Three themes characterized clinicians' difficulty approaching ACP (preconceived views of patients' preferences, narrow definitions of successful ACP, and lack of institutional resources), while the final theme illustrated facilitators to ACP (acknowledging bias and rejecting stereotypes, mission-driven focus on ACP, and acceptance of all preferences). CONCLUSIONS: Most clinicians avoided ACP with certain racial and ethnic groups, those with limited English fluency, and persons with certain religious beliefs. Our findings provide evidence to support development of clinician-level and institutional-level interventions and to reduce disparities in ACP.

Equitably Allocating Resources during Crises: Racial Differences in Mortality Prediction Models.

Rationale: Crisis standards of care (CSCs) guide critical care resource allocation during crises. Most recommend ranking patients on the basis of their expected in-hospital mortality using the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, but it is unknown how SOFA or other acuity scores perform among patients of different races. Objectives: To test the prognostic accuracy of the SOFA score and version 2 of the Laboratory-based Acute Physiology Score (LAPS2) among Black and white patients. Methods: We included Black and white patients admitted for sepsis or acute respiratory failure at 27 hospitals. We calculated the discrimination and calibration for in-hospital mortality of SOFA, LAPS2, and modified versions of each, including categorical SOFA groups recommended in a popular CSC and a SOFA score without creatinine to reduce the influence of race. Measurements and Main Results: Of 113,158 patients, 27,644 (24.4%) identified as Black. The LAPS2 demonstrated higher discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC], 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-0.77) than the SOFA score (AUC, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.68-0.69). The LAPS2 was also better calibrated than the SOFA score, but both underestimated in-hospital mortality for white patients and overestimated in-hospital mortality for Black patients. Thus, in a simulation using observed mortality, 81.6% of Black patients were included in lower-priority CSC categories, and 9.4% of all Black patients were erroneously excluded from receiving the highest prioritization. The SOFA score without creatinine reduced racial miscalibration. Conclusions: Using SOFA in CSCs may lead to racial disparities in resource allocation. More equitable mortality prediction scores are needed.

The Impact of Resident Holdover Admissions on Length of Hospital Stay and Risk of Transfer to an Intensive Care Unit.

OBJECTIVE: Implementation of residency duty hour standards has led to adoption of different staffing models, such as the "holdover" model, whereby nighttime teams admit patients and transfer their care to daytime teams who provide ongoing care. In contrast, nonholdover teams at our institution are responsible for both admitting patients and providing ongoing care. We sought to determine whether patients admitted by holdover teams experience worse outcomes than those admitted by nonholdover teams. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to the internal medicine hospital service at a quaternary care hospital from July 2013 to June 2015. Primary outcomes included hospital length of stay (LOS) and transfer to an intensive care unit within 72 hours of admission. Secondary outcomes were any transfer to an intensive care unit, in-hospital mortality, discharge to home (versus discharge to postacute care facility), and readmission to the health system within 30 days of discharge. RESULTS: We analyzed 5518 encounters, 64% of which were admitted by a holdover team. Outcomes were similar between study groups, except the LOS, which was 5.5 hours longer for holdover encounters in unadjusted analyses (5.18 versus 4.95 days, P = 0.04) but not significantly different in adjusted analyses. The mean discharge time was 4:00 p.m. for both groups, whereas the mean admission times were 12:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. for holdover and nonholdover encounters, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Holdover encounters at our institution were not associated with worse patient safety outcomes. A small increase in LOS may have been attributable to holdover patients having earlier admission and identical discharge times.

Association of Billed Advance Care Planning with End-of-Life Care Intensity for 2017 Medicare Decedents.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) reimburses clinicians for advance care planning (ACP) discussions with Medicare patients. The objective of the study was to examine the association of CMS-billed ACP visits with end-of-life (EOL) healthcare utilization. DESIGN: Patient-level analyses of claims for the random 20% Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) sample of decedents in 2017. To account for multiple comparisons, Bonferroni adjusted P value <.008 was considered statistically significant. SETTING: Nationally representative sample of Medicare FFS beneficiaries. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 237,989 Medicare FFS beneficiaries who died in 2017 and included those with and without a billed ACP visit during 2016-17. INTERVENTION: The key exposure variable was receipt of first billed ACP (none, >1 month before death). MEASUREMENTS: Six measures of EOL healthcare utilization or intensity (inpatient admission, emergency department [ED] visit, intensive care unit [ICU] stay, and expenditures within 30 days of death, in-hospital death, and first hospice within 3 days of death). Analyses was adjusted for age, race, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, expenditure by Dartmouth hospital referral region (high, medium, or low), and dual eligibility. RESULTS: Overall, 6.3% (14,986) of the sample had at least one billed ACP visit. After multivariable adjustment, patients with an ACP visit experienced significantly less intensive EOL care on four of six measures: hospitalization (odds ratio [OR] = .77; 95% confidence interval [CI] = .74-.79), ED visit (OR = .77; 95% CI = .75-.80), or ICU stay (OR = .78; 95% CI = .74-.81) within a month of death; and they were less likely to die in the hospital (OR = .79; 95% CI = .76-.82). There were no differences in the rate of late hospice enrollment (OR = .97; 95% CI = .92-1.01; P = .119) or mean expenditures ($242.50; 95% CI = -$103.63 to $588.61; P = .169). CONCLUSION: Billed ACP visits were relatively uncommon among Medicare FFS decedents, but their occurrence was associated with less intensive EOL utilization. Further research on the variables affecting hospice use and expenditures in the EOL period is recommended to understand the relative role of ACP.

Advance Care Planning Claims and Health Care Utilization Among Seriously Ill Patients Near the End of Life.

Importance: Although advance care planning is known to increase patient and caregiver satisfaction, its association with health care utilization is not well understood. Objective: To examine the association between billed advance care planning encounters and subsequent health care utilization among seriously ill patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study conducted from October 1, 2015, to May 31, 2018, used a national commercial insurance claims database to retrieve data from 18 484 Medicare Advantage members 65 years or older who had a claim that contained a serious illness diagnosis. Exposure: A claim that contained an advance care planning billing code between October 1, 2016, and November 30, 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures: Receipt of intensive therapies, hospitalization, emergency department use, hospice use, costs, and death during the 6-month follow-up period. Results: The final study sample included 18 484 seriously ill patients (mean [SD] age, 79.7 [7.9] years; 10 033 [54.3%] female), 864 (4.7%) of whom had a billed advanced care planning encounter between October 1, 2016, and November 30, 2017. In analyses adjusted for patient characteristics and a propensity score for advance care planning, the presence of a billed advance care planning encounter was associated with a higher likelihood of hospice enrollment (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 2.52; 95% CI, 2.22-2.86) and mortality (hazard ratio, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.79-2.88) compared with no billed advance care planning encounter. Although patients with billed advance care planning encounters were also more likely to be hospitalized (IRR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.26-1.49), including in the intensive care unit (IRR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.08-1.45), they were less likely to receive any intensive therapies (IRR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.78-0.92), such as chemotherapy (IRR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.55-0.78). Similar results were observed in a propensity score-matched analysis (99% matched) and in a decedent analysis of patients who died during the 6-month follow-up period. Conclusions and Relevance: Patients with billed advance care planning encounters were more likely than those without these encounters to receive hospice services and less likely to receive any intensive therapies, such as chemotherapy. However, they were also hospitalized more frequently than patients without billed advance care planning encounters. Although these findings were robust to multiple analytic methods, the results may be attributable to residual confounding because of a higher unmeasured severity of illness in the advance care planning group. Additional evidence appears to be needed to understand the effect of advance care planning on these outcomes.

Determining the Association Between End-of-Life Care Resources and Patient Outcomes in Pennsylvania ICUs.

OBJECTIVES: As ICUs are increasingly a site of end-of-life care, many have adopted end-of-life care resources. We sought to determine the association of such resources with outcomes of ICU patients. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Pennsylvania ICUs. PATIENTS: Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. INTERVENTIONS: Availability of any of one hospital-based resource (palliative care consultants) or four ICU-based resources (protocol for withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy, triggers for automated palliative care consultation, protocol for family meetings, and palliative care clinicians embedded in ICU rounds). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In mixed-effects regression analyses, admission to a hospital with end-of-life resources was not associated with mortality, length of stay, or treatment intensity (mechanical ventilation, hemodialysis, tracheostomy, gastrostomy, artificial nutrition, or cardiopulmonary resuscitation); however, it was associated with a higher likelihood of discharge to hospice (odds ratio, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.11-2.24), an effect that was driven by ICU-based resources (odds ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.04-1.81) rather than hospital-based resources (odds ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.83-1.71). Instrumental variable analysis using differential distance (defined as the additional travel distance beyond the hospital closest to a patient's home needed to reach a hospital with end-of-life resources) demonstrated that among those for whom differential distance would influence receipt of end-of-life resources, admission to a hospital with such resources was not associated with any outcome. CONCLUSIONS: ICU-based end-of-life care resources do not appear to change mortality but are associated with increased hospice utilization. Given that this finding was not confirmed by the instrumental variable analysis, future studies should attempt to verify this finding, and identify specific resources or processes of care that impact the care of ICU patients at the end of life.