Palliative Care in the Community: The Greek Version of the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT™).

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES: Systematic identification of persons with palliative care needs constitutes a major challenge for promoting palliative care in all levels of the health system, including primary care. The aim of this study was to translate, cross-culturally adapt, and content validate Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT) for use in the Greek primary care context. Secondary objectives were to probe the use of SPICT-GR in exemplary case vignettes, to discuss the clarity and comprehensibility of its content as well as the appropriateness, acceptability, and feasibility of the tool within the Greek primary care. METHODS: The Greek translation and cross-cultural adaptation of SPICT™ followed World Health Organization recommendations for translation and adaptation of instruments. For this purpose a working group was set up consisting of 2 senior researchers, a primary care professional with postgraduate training in Palliative Medicine and a general practitioner (GP) with special interest in primary palliative care. Three focus groups comprised of health professionals (n = 23) working in primary care settings participated in the pilot testing phase. Participants also completed a questionnaire including rating their perceptions on tool's utility and feasibility as well as on the clarity and relevance of its items. Thematic analysis was used for focus groups discussions on how the tool was perceived and interpreted by health professionals in a Greek healthcare context and descriptive statistics for the quantitative analysis of the questionnaire data. RESULTS: The majority assessed the tool as useful (65%), considered its implementation in primary care as feasible (91%) and rated its items as "relevant" or "very relevant" and "clear" or "very clear." Three themes emerged from focus groups discussions: Guiding clinical practice and facilitating collaboration; promoting comprehensive care and awareness for palliative care; applicability in and suitability for primary care. CONCLUSIONS: SPICT-GR™ was identified as a practical and applicable tool for primary care, a source of guidance for the comprehensive identification of patients' palliative care needs, promoting awareness on palliative care and facilitating a shared language among health care professionals.

A Survey of Clinicians Regarding Goals of Care for Patients with Severe Comorbid Illnesses Hospitalized for an Acute Deterioration.

Background: Patients with terminal illnesses hospitalized with acute deteriorations often suffer from unnecessary/inappropriate therapies at the end of their lives. Appropriate advance care planning (ACP) practices aligned to patients' goals of care may mitigate this. Materials and methods: To explore the rationale for clinical decision-making in hospitalized patients with terminal illnesses and formulate a practice pathway to streamline care. Between May and December 2018, a questionnaire survey with three case vignettes derived from intensive care unit (ICU) patients was emailed to ICU, respiratory and renal doctors, and nurses in two Sydney hospitals. Respondents chose various management options ranging from all active therapies to palliation. The primary outcome was the proportion of responses for each management option. With these and a thematic analysis of responses to identify barriers to ACP practice, a practice pathway was formulated. Results: Of the 310 invited clinicians, 178 responded (57.4%). About 89.2% of respondents reported caring for dying patients frequently. Sixty percent saw patients suffering from prolonged therapies. Most respondents deemed patients in the case vignettes to be terminally ill, warranting ACP discussions. However, many still wanted to treat the acute deterioration with active ICU-level interventions. Most respondents reported being comfortable in having ACP discussions. Conclusion: The survey showed discordance between the stated opinions and the choice of management options for terminally ill patients with acute deteriorations; possibly due to the lack of a considered approach in choosing management options that align with medical consensus and the patient's/family's wishes, a practice pathway is suggested to improve management. How to cite this article: Sarangi RK, Rajamani A, Lakshmanan R, Srinivasan S, Arvind H. A Survey of Clinicians Regarding Goals of Care for Patients with Severe Comorbid Illnesses Hospitalized for an Acute Deterioration. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(4):457-463.

Supportive and palliative care indicators tool (SPICT™) in a Danish healthcare context: translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and content validation.

BACKGROUND: Early identification of patients who require palliative and supportive care at the general palliative care level is challenging. The Supportive & Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT™) might provide a helpful framework for this process. AIM: To translate, culturally adapt and content validate SPICT™-DK in hospital, primary care, and general practice and within the broader Danish health care context. METHODS: SPICT™-DK was translated and cross-culturally validated by using the TRAPD-model (Translation, Review, adjudication, pretesting, and documentation) as well as the EORTC- translation guide (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer). In the pre-(pilot) testing phase, six focus group interviews and five individual interviews were conducted involving n = 29 health care professionals from general practice, primary care, and hospital. The qualitative data were analyzed through thematic analysis and the SPICT™-DK was then revised and published. RESULTS: The interviews revealed that SPICT™-DK can be used to identify people with palliative care needs. Three themes were derived from the analysis and showed SPICT™-DK provides a linguistic framework but must be used as an interdisciplinary tool as that SPICT™-DK requires competencies and collaboration. CONCLUSION: SPICT™-DK is now translated and culturally validated in a Danish healthcare setting. The tool is useful to identify people with palliative care needs but must be implemented as an interdisciplinary collaborative intervention. SPICT™ -DK cannot be used by all healthcare professionals as it requires disease-specific competencies. However, it provides a common language for early palliative care interventions which can form the basis for interdisciplinary planning of future treatment and care.

Frequency of discussing and documenting advance care planning in primary care: secondary analysis of a multicenter cross-sectional observational study.

BACKGROUND: To improve the quality of advance care planning (ACP) in primary care, it is important to understand the frequency of and topics involved in the ACP discussion between patients and their family physicians (FPs). METHODS: A secondary analysis of a previous multicenter cross-sectional observational study was performed. The primary outcome of this analysis was the frequency of and topics involved in the ACP discussion between outpatients and FPs. In March 2017, 22 family physicians at 17 clinics scheduled a day to assess outpatients and enrolled patients older than 65 years who were recognized by FPs as having regular visits. We defined three ACP discussion topics: 1) future decline in activities of daily living (ADL), 2) future inability to eat, and 3) surrogate decision makers. FPs assessed whether they had ever discussed any ACP topics with each patient and their family members, and if they had documented the results of these discussions in medical records before patients were enrolled in the present study. We defined patients as being at risk of deteriorating and dying if they had at least 2 positive general indicators or at least 1 positive disease-specific indicator in the Japanese version of the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool. RESULTS: In total, 382 patients with a mean age of 77.4 ± 7.9 years were enrolled, and 63.1% were female. Seventy-nine patients (20.7%) had discussed at least one ACP topic with their FPs. However, only 23 patients (6.0%) had discussed an ACP topic with family members and their FPs, with the results being documented in their medical records. The topic of future ADL decline was discussed and documented more often than the other two topics. Patients at risk of deteriorating and dying discussed ACP topics significantly more often than those not at risk of deteriorating and dying (39.4% vs. 16.8%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: FPs may discuss ACP with some of their patients, but may not often document the results of this discussion in medical records. FPs need to be encouraged to discuss ACP with patients and family members and describe the decisions reached in medical records.

Early integration of palliative care: translation, cross-cultural adaptation and content validity of the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool in a Swedish healthcare context.

BACKGROUND: Timely identification of patients with palliative care needs is a prerequisite for being able to carry out effective and equal palliative care. The Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT) identifies patients likely to benefit from a palliative approach. AIM: The main objective was to describe the translation, cross-cultural adaptation and content validation process of the SPICT-SE. In this process, the prefinal SPICT-SE was tested in focus group interviews to explore how the tool was perceived and interpreted by healthcare professionals in a Swedish healthcare context. METHODS: In this qualitative descriptive study, the translation, cross-cultural adaptation and content validation process of the SPICT-SE was based on a recommended method for cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. The process included two independent forward translations, a synthesis, and one independent back-translation. An expert committee consolidated all the versions and developed the prefinal version of the SPICT-SE. The prefinal version of the SPICT-SE was tested in four focus group interviews with physicians and nurses engaged in inpatient or outpatient care in south-west Sweden. A thematic analysis of the transcribed interviews was performed. The SPICT-SE was then revised to the final version. RESULTS: In the thematic analysis, four themes were constructed that together described how the SPICT-SE was perceived and interpreted by healthcare professionals: The mindset is familiar and relevant; the tool needs to be adjusted in order to be clearer; the purpose and consequences of the tool are ambiguous; and the tool supports a palliative approach. CONCLUSION: The SPICT-SE has now been successfully translated, culturally adapted and content validated in a Swedish healthcare context.