Peer-professional workgroups in palliative care: a strategy for advancing professional discourse and practice.

BACKGROUND: As part of a comprehensive national effort to improve care at the end of life, the Promoting Excellence in End-of-Life Care program of The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation convened "national peer-professional workgroups" of recognized authorities or leaders to advance palliative aspects of practice in their respective specialties or fields. OBJECTIVE: The conveners' goals were to establish research and practice agendas to integrate palliative care within selected fields and health care settings, and to expand delivery of palliative care to special patient populations that have been underserved by palliative care. We hypothesized that leading professionals within specific fields, chartered to achieve clear goals, and then provided with sufficient administrative and logistical support, could develop recommendations for expanding access to, quality of and financing for palliative care within their disciplines. DESIGN: Staff at the national program office of Promoting Excellence in End-of-Life Care convened eight disease-based, specialty-based or issue-based workgroups (the selected workgroup topics were amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, cost accounting, critical care, end-stage renal disease, human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immune deficiency syndrome [HIV/AIDS] disease, Huntington's disease, pediatric care, and surgical palliative care). The national program office implemented a small group process design in convening the groups, and provided coordination, oversight and administrative support, along with funds to support meetings (telephone and in-person). A workgroup "charter" guided groups in determining the scope of efforts and set specific, time-limited goals. From the outset, the workgroups developed plans for dissemination of workgroup recommendations to defined stakeholder audiences, including health care providers, policy-makers, payers, researchers, funders, educators, professional organizations and patient advocacy groups. SETTING AND SUBJECTS: Groups averaged 25 members and met for an average of 24 months. Promoting Excellence leadership chose workgroup topic areas that addressed patient populations underserved for palliative care, and corresponding professional specialties with demonstrated interest and readiness to improve education, evidence base, and professional expertise in palliative aspects of care. RESULTS: Each workgroup was highly productive and advanced changes in respective fields through developing and disseminating recommendations to their respective fields regarding practice, education, clinical and health service research and policy. Beyond their chartered responsibilities, workgroups also developed educational programs and curricula and a wide array of resources. The workgroups also authored articles for publication, intended to stimulate professional discourse and influence clinical norms and culture. CONCLUSIONS: The national peer-professional workgroup model exceeded original expectations and produced well-considered Recommendations to the Field as well as a body of resources for professionals in expanding access to and quality of palliative care. Results of this experimental venture in professional change suggest that the workgroup model may be a useful, cost-effective, rapid-change strategy for quality improvement in other areas of professional practice and service delivery.

Promoting excellence in end-of-life care: a report on innovative models of palliative care.

BACKGROUND: Promoting Excellence in End-of Life Care, a national program of The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, funded 22 demonstration projects representing a wide range of health care settings and patient populations to develop innovative models for delivering palliative care that addressed documented deficiencies in the care of patients and families facing the final stage of life. OBJECTIVE: To determine the practicality (feasibility of development and operation as well as acceptance by stakeholders) of new models of care and to determine the impact of the models on access to, quality of and financing for palliative care. DESIGN: The program cannot report scientifically rigorous outcomes, but the grant-funded projects used a variety of methods and measures to assess acceptance of new models and their impact from the perspectives of various stakeholders, including patients and their families, clinicians, administrators and payers. While it is not possible to aggregate data across projects, the data reported to the Promoting Excellence national program office were used to describe program impact with respect to the practicality of palliative care service integration into existing clinical care settings (feasibility and acceptance by stakeholders), the availability and use of palliative care services (access), quality of care (conformance to patient expectations and accepted clinical standards) and costs of care. SETTINGS AND SUBJECTS: The 22 projects provided services in urban as well as rural settings, in integrated health systems, hospitals, outpatient clinics, cancer centers, nursing homes, renal dialysis clinics, inner city public health and safety net systems and prisons. Populations served included prison inmates, military veterans, renal dialysis patients, Native Americans, Native Alaskans, and African American patients, inner-city medically underserved patients, pediatric patients, and persons with serious mental illness patients. RESULTS: Hosting or adopting institutions sustained or expanded twenty of the 22 models, and feedback from all stakeholders was positive. Project sites developed and utilized new palliative care services and addressed quality through implementation of new standards and clinical protocols. Costs of care, where they could be assessed, were unaffected or decreased for project patients versus historical or concurrent controls. CONCLUSIONS: The 22 Promoting Excellence in End-of Life Care projects demonstrated that by individualizing patient and family assessment, effectively employing existing resources and aligning services with specific patient and family needs, it is possible to expand access to palliative services and improve quality of care in ways that are financially feasible and acceptable to patients, families, clinicians, administrators, and payers.