Evolution of Telehealth-Its Impact on Palliative Care and Medication Management.

Palliative care plays a crucial role in enhancing the quality of life for individuals facing serious illnesses, aiming to alleviate suffering and provide holistic support. With the advent of telehealth, there is a growing interest in leveraging technology to extend the reach and effectiveness of palliative care services. This article provides a comprehensive review of the evolution of telehealth, the current state of telemedicine in palliative care, and the role of telepharmacy and medication management. Herein we highlight the potential benefits, challenges, and future directions of palliative telemedicine. As the field continues to advance, the article proposes key considerations for future research, policy development, and clinical implementation, aiming to maximize the advantages of telehealth in assisting individuals and their families throughout the palliative care journey. The comprehensive analysis presented herein contributes to a deeper understanding of the role of telehealth in palliative care and serves as a guide for shaping its future trajectory.

Rational Prescribing of Pancreatic Enzymes for Patients with Pancreatic Cancer.

Most patients with pancreatic cancer at some point present with symptoms related to exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EPI). These include diarrhea, abdominal bloating, indigestion, steatorrhea, weight loss, and anorexia. Even though up to 80% of pancreatic cancer patients eventually present with symptoms related to exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, only 21% are prescribed pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT). Its effectiveness is also highly dependent on its proper timing of administration, and patients must be thoroughly educated about this. The impact of symptoms of EPI can lead to poorer overall well-being. Pharmacists play a crucial role in properly educating patients on the correct use of pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy. PERT is a key strategy in managing the symptoms of EPI and can improve quality of life, which is a central focus in palliative care. This treatment is profoundly underutilized in the palliative care of these patients. The objective of this review is to discuss the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, side effects, available evidence of the effectiveness of pancreatic enzyme use for patients with pancreatic cancer, and challenges, along with proposed solutions regarding its use.

A Systematic Review of Naldemedine and Naloxegol for the Treatment of Opioid-Induced Constipation in Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is a pervasive and distressing side effect of chronic opioid therapy in patients with cancer pain, significantly impacting their quality of life. Peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAS) were developed for treatment-resistant OIC but most studies were conducted with non-cancer patients. OBJECTIVE: to discuss two oral formulations of PAMORAs, naldemedine and naloxegol, and to review available evidence of the effectiveness of these drugs for OIC in cancer patients. METHODS: a comprehensive search to identify primary literature for either naldemedine or naloxegol for OIC in cancer patients. RESULTS: Only three prospective randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials for naldemedine enrolling cancer patients were identified; the results of a subgroup analysis of two of those studies and two non-interventional post marketing surveillance studies of these trials are also reported here. For naloxegol, only two randomized controlled trials were identified; both were unsuccessful in enrolling sufficient patients. An additional four prospective non-interventional observational studies with naloxegol were found that enrolled cancer patients. There were significantly higher rates of responders in the PAMORA groups than in the placebo groups. The most common side effect for both PAMORAs was diarrhea. LIMITATIONS: All studies were industry-funded, and given that only three trials were randomized controlled studies, the overall quality of the studies was lacking. CONCLUSION: Naldemedine or naloxegol appeared safe and useful in the treatment of OIC in cancer patients and may improve their quality of life. Larger-scale randomized placebo-controlled studies of PAMORAs in cancer patients would strengthen existing evidence.

A Review of Olanzapine in the Treatment of Cancer Anorexia-Cachexia Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Cancer anorexia-cachexia syndrome (CAS) is a multifactorial condition that is highly prevalent in advanced cancer patients and associated with significant reduction in functional performance, reduction in quality of life, and increased mortality. Currently, no medications are approved for this indication. Recently, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) released a rapid recommendation suggesting that low-dose olanzapine once daily may be used to treat cancer cachexia. Many questions still exist on how to use olanzapine for this indication in clinical practice. The objective of this review is to identify existing knowledge on the use of olanzapine for CAS. METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted to identify the primary literature that involved olanzapine for anorexia and cachexia in cancer patients between 2000 and 2023. RESULTS: Seven articles were identified and are discussed here, including two randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled studies, one randomized comparative study, two prospective open-label studies, one retrospective chart review, and one case report. CONCLUSIONS: Low dose olanzapine (2.5-5 mg once daily) may be useful in the treatment of CAS for increasing appetite, reducing nausea and vomiting, and promoting weight gain. Further large-scale multi-center randomized placebo-controlled studies will be needed to investigate the impact of olanzapine on weight change in CAS patients.

The Role of an Inpatient Hospice and Palliative Clinical Pharmacist in the Interdisciplinary Team.

Palliative care is a specialized health care service for individuals with serious illness at any stage and can be provided in any setting. Current national consensus developed by palliative care experts recommends the inclusion of pharmacists in an interdisciplinary team (IDT) to provide quality palliative care. However, national registry data report that less than 10% of inpatient palliative teams in the U.S. have a clinical pharmacist. Clinical pharmacists have an impactful role in palliative patients' quality of life by optimizing symptom management, deprescribing, and providing education to the palliative care team as well as patients and their families. In this report, we review the current literature on the role of a palliative pharmacist in an inpatient palliative care setting and compare and contrast this with our own clinical practice, providing case examples about the role of a palliative clinical pharmacist in an interdisciplinary inpatient palliative care setting. Future strategies are needed to increase post-graduate specialized pharmacy residency training in palliative care as well as education on palliative and hospice care in pharmacy schools to support the role of clinical pharmacists in palliative care.

AGS Position Statement: Resource Allocation Strategies and Age-Related Considerations in the COVID-19 Era and Beyond.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to impact older adults disproportionately, from severe illness and hospitalization to increased mortality risk. Concurrently, concerns about potential shortages of healthcare professionals and health supplies to address these needs have focused attention on how resources are ultimately allocated and used. Some strategies misguidedly use age as an arbitrary criterion, inappropriately disfavoring older adults. This statement represents the official policy position of the American Geriatrics Society (AGS). It is intended to inform stakeholders including hospitals, health systems, and policymakers about ethical considerations to consider when developing strategies for allocating scarce resources during an emergency involving older adults. Members of the AGS Ethics Committee collaborated with interprofessional experts in ethics, law, nursing, and medicine (including geriatrics, palliative care, emergency medicine, and pulmonology/critical care) to conduct a structured literature review and examine relevant reports. The resulting recommendations defend a particular view of distributive justice that maximizes relevant clinical factors and deemphasizes or eliminates factors placing arbitrary, disproportionate weight on advanced age. The AGS positions include (1) avoiding age per se as a means for excluding anyone from care; (2) assessing comorbidities and considering the disparate impact of social determinants of health; (3) encouraging decision makers to focus primarily on potential short-term (not long-term) outcomes; (4) avoiding ancillary criteria such as "life-years saved" and "long-term predicted life expectancy" that might disadvantage older people; (5) forming and staffing triage committees tasked with allocating scarce resources; (6) developing institutional resource allocation strategies that are transparent and applied uniformly; and (7) facilitating appropriate advance care planning. The statement includes recommendations that should be immediately implemented to address resource allocation strategies during COVID-19, aligning with AGS positions. The statement also includes recommendations for post-pandemic review. Such review would support revised strategies to ensure that governments and institutions have equitable emergency resource allocation strategies, avoid future discriminatory language and practice, and have appropriate guidance to develop national frameworks for emergent resource allocation decisions. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:1136-1142, 2020.

Rationing Limited Healthcare Resources in the COVID-19 Era and Beyond: Ethical Considerations Regarding Older Adults.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to impact older adults disproportionately with respect to serious consequences ranging from severe illness and hospitalization to increased mortality risk. Concurrently, concerns about potential shortages of healthcare professionals and health supplies to address these issues have focused attention on how these resources are ultimately allocated and used. Some strategies, for example, misguidedly use age as an arbitrary criterion that disfavors older adults in resource allocation decisions. This is a companion article to the American Geriatrics Society (AGS) position statement, "Resource Allocation Strategies and Age-Related Considerations in the COVID-19 Era and Beyond." It is intended to inform stakeholders including hospitals, health systems, and policymakers about ethical considerations that should be considered when developing strategies for allocation of scarce resources during an emergency involving older adults. This review presents the legal and ethical background for the position statement and discusses these issues that informed the development of the AGS positions: (1) age as a determining factor, (2) age as a tiebreaker, (3) criteria with a differential impact on older adults, (4) individual choices and advance directives, (5) racial/ethnic disparities and resource allocation, and (6) scoring systems and their impact on older adults. It also considers the role of advance directives as expressions of individual preferences in pandemics. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:1143-1149, 2020.

Results From a Survey of American Geriatrics Society Members' Views on Physician-Assisted Suicide.

BACKGROUND: Physician-assisted suicide (PAS) is a controversial practice, currently legal in nine states and the District of Columbia. No prior study explores the views of the American Geriatrics Society (AGS) membership on PAS. DESIGN: We surveyed 1488 randomly selected AGS members via email. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 369 AGS members completed the survey (24.8% response rate). ANALYSIS: We conducted bivariate correlation analyses of beliefs related to support for PAS. We also conducted qualitative analysis of open-ended responses. RESULTS: There was no consensus regarding the acceptability of PAS, with 47% supporting and 52% opposing this practice. PAS being legal in the respondent's state, belief that respect for autonomy alone is sufficient to justify PAS, and intent to prescribe or support requests for PAS if legal in state of practice all correlated with support for PAS. There was no consensus on whether the AGS should oppose, support, or adopt a neutral stance on PAS. Most respondents believed that PAS is more complex among patients with low health literacy, low English proficiency, disability, dependency, or frailty. Most respondents supported mandatory palliative care consultation and independent assessments from two physicians. Themes identified from qualitative analysis include role of the medical profession, uncertainty of the role of professional organizations, potential unintended consequences, autonomy, and ethical and moral considerations. CONCLUSION: There was no consensus among respondents regarding the acceptability of PAS. Respondents expressed concern about vulnerable older populations and the need for safeguards when responding to requests for PAS. Ethical, legal, and policy discussions regarding PAS should consider vulnerable populations. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:23-30, 2019.

Utilization of genomic testing in advanced non-small cell lung cancer among oncologists in the Veterans Health Administration.

Current national guidelines recommend genomic testing on all stage 4 non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) of adenocarcinoma histology. Mutations are most often found among young, Asian, females without a history of smoking. As these characteristics are uncommon in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) patient population, we sought to understand oncologists' decision-making processes regarding utilization of genomic testing in the VHA. We conducted in-depth qualitative interviews with 30 VHA-based medical oncologists. Interviews aimed to elicit oncologists' experiences and decision-making processes regarding genomic testing in patients with stage 4 non-small cell lung cancer with adenocarcinoma histology. Analysis was guided by principles of framework analysis. Sample size was determined by thematic saturation. We identified a wide variation in medical oncologists' genomic testing practices. Consistent with guidelines, advanced stage and adenocarcinoma histology most often influenced practice patterns among our participants. However, patient characteristics like gender, age, smoking status, and performance status were also taken in to account by some oncologists when making testing decisions. This does not reflect a widespread adoption of national guidelines for genomic testing in the VHA. Qualitative interviews with VHA-based oncologists demonstrated that genomic testing decisions are not always consistent with current national guidelines. Efforts should be made to address modifiable barriers to genomic testing in the VHA setting.

Barriers and Facilitators to the Use of Genomic-Based Targeted Lung Cancer Therapies in the VA: Qualitative Findings.

Reflexive testing, standardization of the mutation test ordering procedure and results reporting, and elimination of the preauthorization requirements could facilitate the utilization of targeted therapies.

Opioids in Cancer Pain: Right or Privilege?

Opioid analgesia is a mainstay of the treatment of cancer pain. Treatment of pain in patients with cancer with an ongoing substance abuse disorder can be difficult. We report the ethical challenges of treating a patient with cancer with a concomitant substance abuse disorder in an outpatient palliative care setting. We present an analysis of ethical considerations for the palliative care physician and strategies to aid in the successful treatment of such patients. We argue that there are select patients with cancer for whom exclusion from treatment with opioid therapy is warranted if their health is endangered by prescription of these medications.

Use of a values inventory as a discussion aid about end-of-life care: A pilot randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: We examined the utility of a brief values inventory as a discussion aid to elicit patients' values and goals for end-of-life (EoL) care during audiotaped outpatient physician-patient encounters. METHOD: Participants were seriously ill male outpatients (n = 120) at a large urban Veterans Affairs medical center. We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial, randomizing 60 patients to either the intervention (with the values inventory) or usual care. We used descriptive statistics and qualitative methods to analyze the data. We coded any EoL discussions and recorded the length of such discussions. RESULTS: A total of 8 patients (13%) in the control group and 13 (23%) in the intervention group had EoL discussions with a physician (p = 0.77). All EoL discussions in the control group were initiated by the physician, compared with only five (38%) in the intervention group. Because most EoL discussions took place toward the end of the encounter, discussions were usually brief. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: The outpatient setting has been promoted as a better place for discussing EoL care than a hospital during an acute hospitalization for a chronic serious illness. However, the low effectiveness of our intervention calls into question the feasibility of discussing EoL care during a single outpatient visit. Allowing extra time or an extra visit for EoL discussions might increase the efficacy of advance care planning.

Decision-making styles of seriously ill male Veterans for end-of-life care: Autonomists, Altruists, Authorizers, Absolute Trusters, and Avoiders.

OBJECTIVE: To describe self-reported decision-making styles and associated pathways through end-of-life (EOL) decision-making for African-American, Caucasian, and Hispanic seriously ill male Veterans, and to examine potential relationships of race/ethnicity on these styles. METHODS: Forty-four African American, White, and Hispanic male Veterans with advanced serious illnesses participated in 8 racially/ethnically homogenous focus groups. Transcripts were qualitatively analyzed to identify major themes, with particular attention to themes that might be unique to each of the racial/ethnic groups. RESULTS: Patients described two main decision-making styles, deciding for oneself and letting others decide, leading to five variants that we labeled Autonomists, Altruists, Authorizers, Absolute Trusters, and Avoiders. These variants, with exception of avoiders (not found among White patients), were found across all racial/ethnic groups. The variants suggested different 'implementation strategies', i.e., how clear patients made decisions and whether or not they then effectively communicated them. CONCLUSION: These identified decision-making styles and variants generate strategies for clinicians to better address individualized advance care planning. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Physicians should elicit seriously ill patients' decision-making styles and consider potential implementation strategies these styles may generate, thus tailoring individualized recommendations to assist patients in their advance care planning. Patient-centered EOL decision-making can ensure that patient preferences are upheld.

The utility of reflective writing after a palliative care experience: can we assess medical students' professionalism?

BACKGROUND: Medical education leaders have called for a curriculum that proactively teaches knowledge, skills, and attitudes required for professional practice and have identified professionalism as a competency domain for medical students. Exposure to palliative care (PC), an often deeply moving clinical experience, is an optimal trigger for rich student reflection, and students' reflective writings can be explored for professional attitudes. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to evaluate the merit of using student reflective writing about a PC clinical experience to teach and assess professionalism. METHODS: After a PC patient visit, students wrote a brief reflective essay. We explored qualitatively if/how evidence of students' professionalism was reflected in their writing. Five essays were randomly chosen to develop a preliminary thematic structure, which then guided analysis of 30 additional, randomly chosen essays. Analysts coded transcripts independently, then collaboratively, developed thematic categories, and selected illustrative quotes for each theme and subtheme. RESULTS: Essays revealed content reflecting more rich information about students' progress toward achieving two professionalism competencies (demonstrating awareness of one's own perspectives and biases; demonstrating caring, compassion, empathy, and respect) than two others (displaying self-awareness of performance; recognizing and taking actions to correct deficiencies in one's own behavior, knowledge, and skill). CONCLUSIONS: Professional attitudes were evident in all essays. The essays had limited use for formal summative assessment of professionalism competencies. However, given the increasing presence of PC clinical experiences at medical schools nationwide, we believe this assessment strategy for professionalism has merit and deserves further investigation.

Initiation of cholinesterase inhibitors in an inpatient setting.

We examined initiation of cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs) to determine whether ChEIs were being newly prescribed without sufficient evaluation for dementia and/or delirium and to explore whether there are differences in outcomes, such as mortality, hospital readmission rates, and duration of hospitalization, between patients newly started on ChEI and those who continued such medications prior to admission. Patients hospitalized in fiscal year 2008 and prescribed ChEI were identified. We reviewed electronic medical records. Of 282 patients, 15.6% (44) were new-starts and 84.4% (238) were continuations. Median length of stay was 16 days in new-starts versus 6 days in continuations (P < .05). Of new-starts, 38.6% were also treated of infection. Chart review additionally suggested possible treatment of delirium by initiation of benzodiazepines and antipsychotics in 11.4% and 22.7% of new-starts, respectively. We observed a substantive practice of initiating ChEIs in hospitalized elderly patients at risk of delirium. Although there was no difference in the 30-day mortality or readmission rates, new-starts were more likely to have a longer hospital stay than continuation patients.

To stent or not to stent: an evidence-based approach to palliative procedures at the end of life.

Patients near the end of life often undergo invasive procedures, such as biliary stenting for obstructive jaundice, with the intent of relieving symptoms. We describe a case in which the medical team and a patient and family are considering a second palliative biliary stent despite the patient's limited life expectancy. We review available evidence to inform the decision, focusing on the specific question of whether the benefits of palliative biliary stents in patients with advanced cancer outweigh the risks. We then apply the evidence to the issue of how the primary and/or palliative care team and the interventionist communicate with patients and their families about the risks and benefits of palliative procedures. Review of the evidence found several prospective case series without control groups that measured patient-centered outcomes. Studies had high attrition rates, results for improvements in symptoms and quality of life were mixed, and rates of complications and short-term mortality were high. In conclusion, the limited evidence does not support that the benefits of palliative biliary stents in this population outweigh the risks. We propose that primary care teams consider and discuss the larger picture of the goals of care with patients and families when considering offering these procedures, as well as benefits and potential harms, and consider involving palliative care services early, before consultation with an interventionist.