Differences in Palliative Care Provision by Primary and Specialist Providers Supporting Patients With COVID-19: A Qualitative Study.

Objectives: To describe the delivery of palliative care by primary providers (PP) and specialist providers (SP) to hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Methods: PP and SP completed interviews about their experiences providing palliative care. Results were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: Twenty-one physicians (11 SP, 10 PP) were interviewed. Six thematic categories emerged. Care provision: PP and SP described their support of care discussions, symptom management, managing end of life, and care withdrawal. Patients provided care: PP described patients at end of life, with comfort-focused goals; SP included patients seeking life-prolonging treatments. Approach to symptom management: SP described comfort, and PP discomfort in providing opioids with survival-focused goals. Goals of care: SP felt these conversations were code status-focused. Supporting family: both groups indicated difficulties engaging families due to visitor restrictions; SP also outlined challenges in managing family grief and need to advocate for family at the bedside. Care coordination: internist PP and SP described difficulties supporting those leaving the hospital. Conclusion: PP and SP may have a different approach to care, which may affect consistency and quality of care.

Physician perceptions of restrictive visitor policies during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Little is understood of the consequences of restrictive visitor policies that were implemented in hospitals to minimize risk of infection during the COVID-19 pandemic. The objective of this study was to describe physician experiences with these policies and reflections of their effects. METHODS: We conducted semistructured phone interviews from September 2020 to March 2021 with physicians practising in Ontario hospitals, recruited via professional networks and snowball sampling. We audio-recorded, transcribed and analyzed interviews to describe and interpret overarching themes by thematic analysis. RESULTS: We interviewed 21 physicians (5 intensivists, 5 internists, 11 specialists in palliative care). Four main thematic categories emerged, including provider, system, patient and caregiver effects. Provider-related factors included increased time and effort on communication with a need to establish limits; increased effort to develop rapport with caregivers; lack of caregiver input on patient care; the need to act as a caregiver surrogate; and the emotional toll of being a gatekeeper or advocate for visitors, exacerbated by lack of evidence for restrictions and inconsistent enforcement. System effects included the avoidance of hospital admission and decreased length of stay, leading to readmissions, increased deaths at home and avoidance of transfer to other facilities with similar policies. Patient-related factors included isolation and dying alone; lack of caregiver advocacy; and prioritization of visitor presence that, at times, resulted in a delay or withdrawal of aspects of care. Caregiver-related factors included inability to personally assess patient health, leading to poor understanding of patient status and challenging decision-making; perceived inadequate communication; difficulty accessing caregiver supports; and increased risk of complicated grief. Participants highlighted a disproportionate effect on older adults and people who did not speak English. INTERPRETATION: Our study highlights substantial negative consequences of restrictive visitor policies, with heightened effects on older adults and people who did not speak English. Research is required to identify whether the benefits of visitor restrictions on infection control outweigh the numerous deleterious consequences to patients, families and care providers.

Identifying barriers and facilitators to palliative care integration in the management of hospitalized patients with COVID-19: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Palliative care is well suited to support patients hospitalized with COVID-19, but integration into care has been variable and generally poor. AIM: To understand barriers and facilitators of palliative care integration for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Internists, Intensivists and palliative care physicians completed semi-structured interviews about their experiences providing care to patients with COVID-19. Results were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-three physicians (13 specialist palliative care, five intensivists, five general internists) were interviewed; mean ± SD age was 42 ± 11 years and 61% were female. Six thematic categories were described including: patient and family factors, palliative care knowledge, primary provider factors, COVID-19 specific factors, palliative care service factors, and leadership and culture factors. Patient and family factors included patient prognosis, characteristics that implied prognosis (i.e., age, etc.), and goals of care. Palliative care knowledge included confidence in primary palliative care skills, misperception that COVID-19 is not a 'palliative diagnosis', and the need to choose quantity or quality of life in COVID-19 management. Primary provider factors included available time, attitude, and reimbursement. COVID-19 specific factors were COVID-19 as an impetus to act, uncertain illness trajectory, treatments and outcomes, and infection control measures. Palliative care service factors were accessibility, adaptability, and previous successful relationships. Leadership and culture factors included government-mandated support, presence at COVID planning tables, and institutional and unit culture. CONCLUSION: The study findings highlight the need for leadership support for formal integrated models of palliative care for patients with COVID-19, a palliative care role in pandemic planning, and educational initiatives with primary palliative care providers.

Referral Practices of Cardiologists to Specialist Palliative Care in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Patients with heart failure have palliative care needs that can be effectively addressed by specialist palliative care (SPC). Despite this, SPC utilization by this patient population is low, suggesting barriers to SPC referral. We sought to determine the referral practices of cardiologists to SPC. METHODS: Cardiologists across Canada were invited to participate in a survey about their referral practices to SPC. Associations between referral practices and demographic, professional, and attitudinal factors were analyzed using multiple and logistic regression. RESULTS: The response rate was 51% (551 of 1082). Between 35.1% and 64.2% of respondents were unaware of referral criteria to local SPC services. Of the respondents, 29% delayed SPC referral because of prognostic uncertainty, and 46.8% believed that SPC prioritizes patients with cancer. In actual practice, nearly three-fourths of cardiologists referred late. Referral frequency was associated with greater availability of SPC services for patients with nonmalignant diseases (P = 0.008), a higher number of palliative care settings accepting patients receiving continuous infusions or pursuing acute care management (P < 0.001), satisfaction with services (P < 0.001), and less equation of palliative care with end-of-life care (P < 0.001). Early timing of referral was associated with greater availability of SPC services for patients with nonmalignant diseases and less equation of palliative care with end-of-life care. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that barriers to timely SPC referral include an insufficiency of services for patients with nonmalignant diseases especially in the outpatient setting, the perception that SPC services do not accept patients receiving cardiology-specific treatments, and a misperception about the identity of palliative care.

CONTEXTE: Les services de soins palliatifs spécialisés (SPS) peuvent répondre efficacement aux besoins des patients présentant une insuffisance cardiaque. Malgré tout, les patients de cette population n'ont pas beaucoup recours aux SPS, ce qui semble indiquer la présence d'obstacles à l'orientation vers les SPS. Nous avons entrepris de déterminer les pratiques des cardiologues en matière d'orientation des patients vers les SPS. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Les cardiologues de partout au Canada ont été invités à participer à un sondage sur leurs pratiques en matière d'orientation des patients vers les SPS. Les associations entre ces pratiques et certaines caractéristiques démographiques, professionnelles et comportementales ont été analysées au moyen d'une régression multiple et logistique. RÉSULTATS: Le taux de participation au sondage a été de 51 % (551 réponses sur 1 082 invitations). Entre 35,1 et 64,2 % des répondants ne connaissaient pas les critères pour l'orientation des patients vers les services locaux de SPS. Parmi les répondants, 29 % ont dit reporter l'orientation vers les SPS en raison du caractère incertain du pronostic, et 46,8 % croyaient que les SPS s'adressaient en priorité aux patients atteints d'un cancer. Dans la pratique, près des trois quarts des cardiologues ont orienté tardivement les patients. La fréquence des orientations a été associée à une disponibilité plus grande de services de SPS pour les patients atteints de maladies non cancéreuses (p = 0,008), à un nombre plus élevé de milieux de soins palliatifs admettant les patients nécessitant des perfusions continues ou prenant en charge les soins actifs (p < 0,001), à la satisfaction à l'égard des services (p < 0,001) et à une assimilation moins importante des soins palliatifs avec les soins de fin de vie (p < 0,001). L'orientation rapide des patients était associée à une disponibilité plus grande de services de SPS pour les patients atteints de maladies non cancéreuses et à une assimilation moins importante des soins palliatifs avec les soins de fin de vie. CONCLUSIONS: Nos observations semblent indiquer que l'insuffisance des services destinés aux patients atteints de maladies non cancéreuses (en particulier dans le contexte des soins ambulatoires), la perception que les services de SPS n'admettent pas les patients nécessitant des traitements en cardiologie et la perception erronée de la finalité des soins palliatifs constituent des obstacles à l'orientation des patients vers les SPS en temps opportun.

Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: A Palliative Medicine Review of the Disease, Its Therapies, and Drug Interactions.

Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is often a progressive and ultimately fatal disease. It is characterized by an elevated mean pulmonary arterial pressure because of disease of the small pulmonary arterioles. PAH leads to a constellation of symptoms, including dyspnea, fatigue, syncope, chest discomfort, and peripheral edema. Disease-targeted therapies for PAH produce symptomatic and functional improvement, but long-term survival remains uncommon without lung transplantation. Palliative care is appropriate to support patients with advanced PAH who typically have a high symptom burden. However, palliative care has historically focused on supporting patients with malignant disease, rather than progressive chronic disease such as PAH. Our aim is to provide palliative care clinicians with a background in the classification, pathophysiology, and modern treatment of PAH. This review describes disease-targeted therapies and their effects on symptoms, physical functioning, and health-related quality of life. We also review the unique physiology of PAH and its implication for palliative interventions. Pharmacological interactions with, and precautions related to commonly used palliative care medications, are discussed.

Heart Failure: A Palliative Medicine Review of Disease, Therapies, and Medications With a Focus on Symptoms, Function, and Quality of Life.

Despite significant advances in heart failure (HF) treatment, HF remains a progressive, extremely symptomatic, and terminal disease with a median survival of 2.1 years after diagnosis. HF often leads to a constellation of symptoms, including dyspnea, fatigue, depression, anxiety, insomnia, pain, and worsened cognitive function. Palliative care is an approach that improves the quality of life of patients and their caregivers facing the problems associated with life-threatening illness and therefore is well suited to support these patients. However, historically, palliative care has often focused on supporting patients with malignant disease, rather than a progressive chronic disease such as HF. Predicting mortality in patients with HF is challenging. The lack of obvious transition points in disease progression also raises challenges to primary care providers and specialists to know at what point to integrate palliative care during a patient's disease trajectory. Although therapies for HF often result in functional and symptomatic improvements including health-related quality of life (HRQL), some patients with HF do not demonstrate these benefits, including those patients with a preserved ejection fraction. Provision of palliative care for patients with HF requires an understanding of HF pathogenesis and common medications used for these patients, as well as an approach to balancing life-prolonging and HRQL care strategies. This review describes HF and current targeted therapies and their effects on symptoms, hospital admission rates, exercise performance, HRQL, and survival. Pharmacological interactions with and precautions related to commonly used palliative care medications are reviewed. The goal of this review is to equip palliative care clinicians with information to make evidence-based decisions while managing the balance between optimal disease management and patient quality of life.

A look at the potential association between PICOT framing of a research question and the quality of reporting of analgesia RCTs.

BACKGROUND: Methodologists have proposed the formation of a good research question to initiate the process of developing a research protocol that will guide the design, conduct and analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and help improve the quality of reporting such studies. Five constituents of a good research question based on the PICOT framing include: Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, and Time-frame of outcome assessment. The aim of this study was to analyze if the presence a structured research question, in PICOT format, in RCTs used within a 2010 meta-analysis investigating the effectiveness of femoral nerve blocks after total knee arthroplasty, is independently associated with improved quality of reporting. METHODS: Twenty-three RCT reports were assessed for the quality of reporting and then examined for the presence of the five constituents of a structured research question based on PICOT framing. We created a PICOT score (predictor variable), with a possible score between 0 and 5; one point for every constituent that was included. Our outcome variable was a 14 point overall reporting quality score (OQRS) and a 3 point key methodological items score (KMIS) based on the proper reporting of allocation concealment, blinding and numbers analysed using the intention-to-treat principle. Both scores, OQRS and KMIS, are based on the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement. A multivariable regression analysis was conducted to determine if PICOT score was independently associated with OQRS and KMIS. RESULTS: A completely structured PICOT score question was found in 2 of the 23 RCTs evaluated. Although not statistically significant, higher PICOT was associated with higher OQRS [IRR: 1.267; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.984, 1.630; p = 0.066] but not KMIS (1.061 (0.515, 2.188); 0.872). These results are comparable to those from a similar study in terms of the direction and range of IRRs estimates. The results need to be interpreted cautiously due to the small sample size. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that PICOT framing of a research question in anesthesia-related RCTs is not often followed. Even though a statistically significant association with higher OQRS was not found, PICOT framing of a research question is still an important attribute within all RCTs.

Postpartum workup of postdural puncture headache leads to diagnosis and surgical treatment of thoracic pseudomeningocele: a case report.

PURPOSE: Postdural puncture headache is a well-known complication of neuraxial anesthesia in childbirth. There are, however, many other causes of postpartum headache, some of which may present like postdural puncture headache and confuse the diagnosis. We report a case of postpartum headache due to pseudomeningocele. CLINICAL FEATURES: A 31-yr-old primigravida presented at 35 weeks gestation for induction of labour. A pre-pregnancy history of migraines was suspicious for low cerebrospinal fluid headache, but this had been ruled out by normal brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and the headaches had resolved with pregnancy. A labour epidural was easily placed at L3/4. On postpartum day one the patient complained of mild headache, and the severe pre-pregnancy headache returned within weeks. The pounding occipital/hemispheric headache was associated with nausea and vomiting; it worsened over the day, and improved when the patient was supine. A repeat brain MRI showed evidence of intracranial hypotension, and an epidural blood patch was performed at L3/L4 with no improvement. A second blood patch was performed ten days later, still with no improvement. A subsequent brain MRI showed unchanged intracranial hypotension, and a spine MRI revealed a pseudomeningocele at T7. A computed tomography myelogram confirmed a T7/8 pseudomeningocele. The patient underwent direct microsurgical exploration and repair four months later, which was followed by re-operation ten months later. The patient's condition has since remained significantly improved. DISCUSSION: This case highlights the importance of maintaining a wide differential in the workup of postpartum headache after regional anesthesia, particularly in cases refractory to blood patch. This case also reveals a T7 pseudomeningocele causing spontaneous intracranial hypotension that otherwise may not have been detected and corrected.

The quality of reporting of RCTs used within a postoperative pain management meta-analysis, using the CONSORT statement.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are routinely used in systematic reviews and meta-analyses that help inform healthcare and policy decision making. The proper reporting of RCTs is important because it acts as a proxy for health care providers and researchers to appraise the quality of the methodology, conduct and analysis of an RCT. The aims of this study are to analyse the overall quality of reporting in 23 RCTs that were used in a meta-analysis by assessing 3 key methodological items, and to determine factors associated with high quality of reporting. It is hypothesized that studies with larger sample sizes, that have funding reported, that are published in journals with a higher impact factor and that are in journals that have adopted or endorsed the CONSORT statement will be associated with better overall quality of reporting and reporting of key methodological items. METHODS: We systematically reviewed RCTs used within an anesthesiology related post-operative pain management meta-analysis. We included all of the 23 RCTs used, all of which were parallel design that addressed the use of femoral nerve block in improving outcomes after total knee arthroplasty. Data abstraction was done independently by two reviewers. The two main outcomes were: 1) 15 point overall quality of reporting score (OQRS) based on the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials (CONSORT) and 2) 3 point key methodological item score (KMIS) based on allocation concealment, blinding and intention-to-treat analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-three RCTs were included. The median OQRS was 9.0 (Interquartile Range = 3). A multivariable regression analysis did not show any significant association between OQRS or KMIS and our four predictor variables hypothesized to improve reporting. The direction and magnitude of our results when compared to similar studies suggest that the sample size and impact factor are associated with improved key methodological item reporting. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of reporting of RCTs used within an anesthesia related meta-analysis is poor to moderate. The information gained from this study should be used by journals to register the urgency for RCTs to be clear and transparent in reporting to help make literature accessible and comparable.

Femoral nerve block improves analgesia outcomes after total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Femoral nerve blockade (FNB) is a common method of analgesia for postoperative pain control after total knee arthroplasty. We conducted a systematic review to compare the analgesia outcomes in randomized controlled trials that compared FNB (with and without sciatic nerve block) with epidural and patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). METHODS: We identified 23 randomized controlled trials that compared FNB with PCA or epidural analgesia. These studies included 1,016 patients, 665 with FNB, 161 with epidural, and 190 with PCA alone. RESULTS: All 10 studies of single-shot FNB (SSFNB) used concurrent PCA opioids. SSFNB was found to reduce PCA morphine consumption at 24 h (-19.9 mg, 95% credible interval [CrI]: -35.2 to -4.6) and 48 h (-38.0 mg, 95% CrI: -56.0 to -19.7), pain scores with activity (but not at rest) at 24 and 48 h (-1.8 visual analog pain scale, 95% CrI: -3.3 to -0.02 at 24 h; -1.5 visual analog pain scale, 95% CrI: -2.9 to -0.02 at 48 h) and reduce the incidence of nausea (0.37 odds ratio, 95% CrI: 0.1 to 0.9) compared with PCA alone. SSFNB had similar morphine consumption and pain scores compared with SSFNB plus sciatic nerve block, and SSFNB plus continuous FNB. CONCLUSIONS: SSFNB or continuous FNB (plus PCA) was found to be superior to PCA alone for postoperative analgesia for patients having total knee arthroplasty. The impact of adding a sciatic block or continuous FNB to a SSFNB needs to be studied further.