"No Escalation of Treatment" Designations: A Multi-institutional Exploratory Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: No Escalation of Treatment (NoET) designations are used in ICUs internationally to limit treatment for critically ill patients. However, they are the subject of debate in the literature and have not been qualitatively studied. RESEARCH QUESTION: How do physicians understand and perceive NoET designations, especially regarding their usefulness and associated challenges? What mechanisms do hospitals provide to facilitate the use of NoET designations? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Qualitative study at seven US hospitals, employing semistructured interviews with 30 physicians and review of relevant institutional records (eg, hospital policies, screenshots of ordering menus in the electronic health record). RESULTS: At all hospitals, participants reported the use of NoET designations, which were understood to mean that providers should withhold new or higher-intensity interventions ("escalations") but not withdraw ongoing interventions. Three hospitals provided a specific mechanism for designating a patient as NoET (eg, a DNR/Do Not Escalate code status order); at the remaining hospitals, a variety of informal methods (eg, verbal hand-offs) were used. We identified five functions of NoET designations: (1) Defining an intermediate point of treatment limitation, (2) helping physicians navigate prearrest clinical decompensations, (3) helping surrogate decision-makers transition toward comfort care, (4) preventing patient harm from invasive measures, and (5) conserving critical care resources. Across hospitals, participants reported implementation challenges related to the ambiguity in meaning of NoET designations. INTERPRETATION: Despite ongoing debate, NoET designations are used in a varied sample of hospitals and are perceived as having multiple functions, suggesting they may fulfill an important need in the care of critically ill patients, especially at the end of life. The use of NoET designations can be improved through the implementation of a formal mechanism that encourages consistency across providers and clarifies the meaning of "escalation" for each patient.

Variation in the design of Do Not Resuscitate orders and other code status options: a multi-institutional qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: US hospitals typically provide a set of code status options that includes Full Code and Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) but often includes additional options. Although US hospitals differ in the design of code status options, this variation and its impacts have not been empirically studied. DESIGN AND METHODS: Multi-institutional qualitative study at 7 US hospitals selected for variability in geographical location, type of institution and design of code status options. We triangulated across three data sources (policy documents, code status ordering menus and in-depth physician interviews) to characterise the code status options available at each hospital. Using inductive qualitative methods, we investigated design differences in hospital code status options and the perceived impacts of these differences. RESULTS: The code status options at each hospital varied widely with regard to the number of code status options, the names and definitions of code status options, and the formatting and capabilities of code status ordering menus. DNR orders were named and defined differently at each hospital studied. We identified five key design characteristics that impact the function of a code status order. Each hospital's code status options were unique with respect to these characteristics, indicating that code status plays differing roles in each hospital. Physician participants perceived that the design of code status options shapes communication and decision-making practices about resuscitation and life-sustaining treatments, especially at the end of life. We identified four potential mechanisms through which this may occur: framing conversations, prompting decisions, shaping inferences and creating categories. CONCLUSIONS: There are substantive differences in the design of hospital code status options that may contribute to known variability in end-of-life care and treatment intensity among US hospitals. Our framework can be used to design hospital code status options or evaluate their function.

Integrating Palliative Care to Promote Earlier Conversations and to Increase the Skill and Comfort of Nonpalliative Care Clinicians: Lessons Learned From an Interventional Field Trial.

While the uptake of palliative care in the United States is steadily improving, there continues to be a gap in which many patients are not offered care that explicitly elicits and respects their personal wishes. This is due in part to a mismatch of supply and demand; the number of seriously ill individuals far exceeds the workload capacities of palliative care specialty providers. We conducted a field trial of an intervention designed to promote the identification of seriously ill patients appropriate for a discussion of their goals of care and to advance the role of nonpalliative care clinicians by enhancing their knowledge of and comfort with primary palliative care skills. At 3 large Midwestern academic medical centers, a palliative care physician or nurse clinician embedded with a selected nonpalliative care service line or unit on a regularly scheduled basis for up to 6 months. Using agreed-upon criteria, patients were identified as being appropriate for a goals of care conversation; conversations with those patients and/or their families were then conducted with the palliative care specialist providing education, coaching, and mentoring to the nonpalliative care clinician, when possible. All of the sites increased the presence of palliative care within the selected service line or unit, and the nonpalliative care clinicians reported increased comfort and skill at conducting goals of care conversations. This intervention is a first step toward increasing patients' access to palliative care to alleviate distress and to more consistently deliver care that honors patient and family preferences.

Across the Continuum: How Inpatient Palliative Care Consultations Are Reported in Hospital Discharge Summaries.

BACKGROUND: Inpatient Palliative Care (PC) consultations help develop a patient-centered and quality-of-life-focused plan of care for patients with serious illness. Discharge summaries (DSs) are an essential tool to maintain continuity of these care plans across multiple locations and providers. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of selected DSs of patients who received inpatient PC consultations at the University of Kansas Hospital from July 2011 to May 2015. The study included patients 18 years or older, patients who were discharged alive, and patients who were not discharged with hospice care. Code words and their related phrases, developed by an expert panel of geriatric medicine and palliative medicine physicians, were used to evaluate the DSs. They were categorized into PC, symptom management, hospice and palliative home health, decision making, and plan of care. We also identified whether there was communication between the primary team and PC team, as well as family meeting status in the PC consultation and notes. RESULTS: Of the 961 chart reviews, no code words were found in 22.8% of the DSs. PC was mentioned in only 63.3% and was the only code word in 5.3%. CONCLUSION: More than one in five DSs lacked any code words of the completed PC consultation and more than one in three DSs lacked mention of PC. As DSs are the main source of provider communication, it is critical they reflect the key discussion points from the PC consultation, which will improve the transition of care and provider communication.

Palliative Care of Urologic Patients at End of Life.

This article focuses on the issues facing patients with advanced and terminal urologic illness, from the framework of care planning based on defining patient-specific and family-specific goals of care, to palliative management strategies for common symptoms and syndromes that these patients and their families experience. This article also focuses on the management of common urologic issues that may arise in the course of care for all patients at the end of life, as well as the impact of these conditions on caregivers.

Practical issues in palliative and quality-of-life care.

Although palliative care is not new to health care or to oncology, oncologists still struggle to maximize the value of this type of care across the entire care continuum and across the patient's trajectory of illness. When we don't use what may be the best tools for the job, at the right times in the care path, we miss opportunities to optimize patient and family coping, to limit suffering, and to ensure that our care plans are patient centered. In this article, we look at how we define palliative care and how the tools of palliative medicine can be used to enhance patient care in the outpatient oncology practice setting.

A model to improve value: the interdisciplinary palliative care services agreement.

Abstract This article examines the definition of value in medical care for palliative care patients and describes an Interdisciplinary Palliative Care Services Agreement, which is a framework for valued, financially sustainable palliative care at a 500-bed academic medical center. Quality standards drive team interventions and also serve as metrics for financial support. The agreement defines staffing ratios necessary for sustainable team growth and represents a financial model that positions the field of palliative medicine competitively among other medical specialities.

Improving knowledge in palliative medicine with a required hospice rotation for third-year medical students.

PURPOSE: The Liaison Committee for Medical Education requires accredited U.S. and Canadian medical schools to teach end-of-life care. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a new required curriculum in palliative medicine for third-year medical students. METHOD: Beginning in July 2001, a required four-day (32 hour) curriculum was piloted as part of an ambulatory month in the 12-week medicine clerkship. Students spent Day 1 in the classroom learning core concepts regarding hospice, palliative care, and symptom management. A two-hour session with a standardized patient to break bad news was included. Students spent Days 2 and 3 making home visits or participating in inpatient care. Day 4 was spent in the classroom reviewing cases they had seen with interdisciplinary faculty, making presentations on assigned topics, and discussing professional self-care. Students completed a self-awareness project. Educational outcomes were measured with the students' completion of five pre- and postcourse assessment instruments: (1) self-assessment of competency, (2) attitudes, (3) concerns, (4) a 50-item, multiple-choice knowledge test, and (5) an assessment of elements of the course. RESULTS: Analysis of 127 paired evaluations showed significant improvements in three instruments: 56% improvement in competence (p <.0001), 29% reduction in concern (p <.0001), and 23% improvement in knowledge (p <.0001). There were no significant changes attitudes (p =.35). CONCLUSION: This 32-hour required curriculum in palliative medicine for third-year medical students improved knowledge. They came to the course with appropriate attitudes that did not change.