Systematic Review of Models of Effective Community Specialist Palliative Care Services for Evidence of Improved Patient-Related Outcomes, Equity, Integration, and Health Service Utilization.

Background: The benefits of palliative care programs are well documented. However, the effectiveness of specialist palliative care services is not well established. The previous lack of consensus on criteria for defining and characterizing models of care has restrained direct comparison between these models and limited the evidence base to inform policy makers. A rapid review for studies published up to 2012 was unable to find an effective model. Aim: To identify effective models of community specialist palliative care services. Design: A mixed-method synthesis design reported according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. Prospero: CRD42020151840. Data sources: Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched in September 2019 for primary research and review articles from 2012 to 2019. Supplementary search was conducted on Google in 2020 for policy documents to identify additional relevant studies. Results: The search yielded 2255 articles; 36 articles satisfied the eligibility criteria and 6 additional articles were identified from other sources. Eight systematic reviews and 34 primary studies were identified: observational studies (n = 24), randomized controlled trials (n = 5), and qualitative studies (n = 5). Community specialist palliative care was found to improve symptom burden/quality of life and to reduce secondary service utilization across cancer and noncancer diagnoses. Much of this evidence relates to face-to-face care in home-based settings with both round-the-clock and episodic care. There were few studies addressing pediatric populations or minority groups. Findings from qualitative studies revealed that care coordination, provision of practical help, after-hours support, and medical crisis management were some of the factors contributing to patients' and caregivers' positive experience. Conclusion: Strong evidence exists for community specialist palliative care to improve quality of life and reducing secondary service utilization. Future research should focus on equity outcomes and the interface between generalist and specialist care.

Community specialist palliative care services in New Zealand: a survey of Aotearoa hospices.

AIM: Community specialist palliative care (SPC) in Aotearoa New Zealand is provided by independent hospices. Substantial increase in demand for palliative care is projected in the next 20 years. We aimed to describe the current landscape of SPC services across Aotearoa whilst incorporating an equity lens. METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional survey was undertaken to describe aspects of hospice service and populations served. Survey links were emailed to clinical, or service leads of hospices identified via Hospice New Zealand Website. RESULTS: All eligible hospices (n=32) completed the online survey. All hospices provided care at home, with 94% (n=30) also providing care for patients in aged residential care facilities. All 32 hospices provided symptom management, family and carer support and bereavement care. Six hospices (19%) did not provide afterhours cover. Fifteen (47%) hospices did not have Maori cultural position and median full time equivalent across all hospices for such position was one day per week. Only nine (28%) hospices provided palliative medicine specialist training. CONCLUSION: Areas of inconsistency were highlighted including afterhours access and cultural support for Maori. The capacity of the present system to address current and future shortages of palliative medicine specialist is questioned.

Cyclizine pharmacovigilance in hospice/palliative care: net effects for nausea or vomiting.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the contemporary real-world use of cyclizine for nausea or vomiting, and the associated benefits and harms. METHODS: This was a prospective, consecutive case series of routine clinical use of cyclizine for nausea or vomiting in palliative care conducted across 19 sites in Australia, Aotearoa/New Zealand and the UK. Clinical outcomes were graded using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events at baseline and 72 hours after initiation of cyclizine. Ad hoc safety reporting continued for 2 weeks. RESULTS: Data were collected from 101 patients between May 2018 and December 2020. Cyclizine was mostly used in combination with another antiemetic. Overall, 79 patients benefited and 32 experienced harm (56 had benefit without harm; 9 had harm without benefit). The most common harms were constipation (13%), somnolence (9%) and confusion (7%), adding to the already high rates of these symptoms at baseline. For the four patients with serious harms (grade ≥3), these were exacerbations of existing symptoms. Nine patients stopped cyclizine at 72 hours and a further 20 patients within 2 weeks. The most common reasons for stopping were lack of benefit and symptom resolution; none stopped because of harms. CONCLUSIONS: When used as described in a palliative care setting, cyclizine benefits about three-quarters of patients, with about one-third experiencing tolerable harms.

Intranasal Fentanyl Versus Placebo for Treatment of Episodic Breathlessness in Hospice Patients With Advanced Nonmalignant Diseases.

CONTEXT: Episodic breathlessness is a distressing and difficult to treat symptom because of its short duration. Fast actioned intranasal fentanyl (INF) is potentially more suitable than oral opioids. OBJECTIVES: To examine the feasibility, preliminary efficacy, and safety of INF for the treatment of episodic breathlessness from advanced nonmalignant conditions in hospice patients. METHODS: Phase IIB, double-blind, randomized controlled, multisite, INF citrate solution vs. placebo crossover feasibility study. Opioid-tolerant patients were to treat six episodes of breathlessness using INF spray. The primary outcome was change in the Visual Analogue Scale for dyspnea (VAS-D) score from baseline to 15 minutes after study drug's administration (VAS-D15). Other outcomes were to collect demographic data and determine the use of rescue medications, safety, and feasibility of the study design. RESULTS: Twenty-one of 49 eligible patients were enrolled, and 19 (90%) patients completed the study. The mean difference in VAS-D15 between fentanyl and placebo was -3.37 mm (95% CI = -10.35 to 3.61 mm; P = 0.337). There was no statistically significant or clinically meaningful difference between INF and placebo in relieving the sensation of discomfort in episodic breathlessness. No significant drug-related adverse event or detrimental effect on vital signs was observed. CONCLUSION: We found no difference between INF and placebo in relieving episodic breathlessness in nonmalignant conditions. INF was well tolerated, and the study design proved to be feasible in hospice patients with advanced diseases. Future study using higher concentration of fentanyl solution may be warranted.