Trend of mortality and length of stay in the emergency department following implementation of a centralized sepsis alert system.

Introduction: Sepsis alerts based on laboratory and vital sign criteria were found insufficient to improve patient outcomes. While most early sepsis alerts were implemented into smaller scale operating systems, a centralized new approach may provide more benefits, overcoming alert fatigue, improving deployment of staff and resources, and optimizing the overall management of sepsis. The objective of the study was to assess mortality and length of stay (LOS) trends in emergency department (ED) patients, following the implementation of a centralized and automated sepsis alert system. Methods: The automated sepsis alert system was implemented in 2021 as part of a hospital-wide command and control center. Administrative data from the years 2018 to 2021 were collected. Data included ED visits, in-hospital mortality, triage levels, LOS, and the Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS). Results: Mortality rate for patients classified as CTAS I triage level was the lowest in 2021, after the implementation of the automated sepsis alert system, compared to 2020, 2019, and 2018 (p < 0.001). The Kaplan-Meier survival curve revealed that for patients classified as CTAS I triage level, the probability of survival was the highest in 2021, after implementation of the sepsis alert algorithm, compared to previous years (Log Rank, Mantel-Cox, χ²=29.742, p < 0.001). No significant differences in survival rate were observed for other triage levels. Conclusion: Implementing an automated sepsis alert system as part of a command center operation significantly improves mortality rate associated with LOS in the ED for patients in the highest triage level. These findings suggest that a centralized early sepsis alert system has the potential to improve patient outcomes.

A command centre implementation before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in a community hospital.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of the study was to assess the effects of high-reliability system by implementing a command centre (CC) on clinical outcomes in a community hospital before and during COVID-19 pandemic from the year 2016 to 2021. METHODS: A descriptive, retrospective study was conducted at an acute care community hospital. The administrative data included monthly average admissions, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, average length of stay, total ICU length of stay, and in-hospital mortality. In-hospital acquired events were recorded and defined as one of the following: cardiac arrest, cerebral infarction, respiratory arrest, or sepsis after hospital admissions. A subgroup statistical analysis of patients with in-hospital acquired events was performed. In addition, a subgroup statistical analysis was performed for the department of medicine. RESULTS: The rates of in-hospital acquired events and in-hospital mortality among all admitted patients did not change significantly throughout the years 2016 to 2021. In the subgroup of patients with in-hospital acquired events, the in-hospital mortality rate also did not change during the years of the study, despite the increase in the ICU admissions during the COVID-19 pandemic.Although the in-hospital mortality rate did not increase for all admitted patients, the in-hospital mortality rate increased in the department of medicine. CONCLUSION: Implementation of CC and centralized management systems has the potential to improve quality of care by supporting early identification and real-time management of patients at risk of harm and clinical deterioration, including COVID-19 patients.

Can we improve healthcare with centralized management systems, supported by information technology, predictive analytics, and real-time data?: A review.

This narrative review discusses the effects of implementing command centers, centralized management systems, supported by information technology, predictive analytics, and real-time data, as well as small-scale centralized operating systems, on patient outcomes, operation, care delivery, and resource utilization. Implementations of command centers and small-scale centralized operating systems have led to improvement in 3 areas: integration of both multiple services into the day-to-day operation, communication and coordination, and employment of prediction and early warning system. Additional studies are required to understand the full impact of command centers on the healthcare system.

"To Be or Not to Be"-Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for Hospitalized People Who Have a Low Probability of Benefit: Qualitative Analysis of Semi-structured Interviews.

Purpose: Our aim was to understand the decision making of patients in hospital who wanted cardiopulmonary resuscitation despite low probability of benefit. Methods: We included patients admitted to general medical wards who had a low chance of surviving in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and had an order in the chart to administer CPR. We developed an interview guide to explore participants' decision-making process, sources of information, and emotions associated with this decision. Results: We developed 3 themes from the data. 1) "Life is worth living . . . for now": Participants describe their enjoyment of life and desire to carry on in their current state. 2) "Making sense of CPR outcomes": Participants saw CPR outcomes as binary, either they live, or they die; deciding not to receive CPR means choosing death. Participants were optimistic they would survive CPR and cited personal experience and TV as information sources. 3) "Decision process": Participants did not engage in shared decision making. Instead, they were asked a binary yes/no question with no reflection on their values or discussion about harms or benefits. Limitations: The probability of successful CPR in our sample is unknown. Findings may be different in a population who is imminently dying but still requesting CPR. Conclusions: Participants chose CPR because they perceived life as worth living and CPR as a chance worth taking. Participants did not want to be left in a severely debilitated state but did not have accurate information about this risk. Implications: Decision making about CPR in-hospital can be improved if it is grounded in accurate risk understanding and the patient's values and wishes.

Patient judgments about hypertension control: the role of patient numeracy and graph literacy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of patient health literacy, numeracy, and graph literacy on perceptions of hypertension control using different forms of data visualization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Participants (Internet sample of 1079 patients with hypertension) reviewed 12 brief vignettes describing a fictitious patient; each vignette included a graph of the patient's blood pressure (BP) data. We examined how variations in mean systolic blood pressure, BP standard deviation, and form of visualization (eg, data table, graph with raw values or smoothed values only) affected judgments about hypertension control and need for medication change. We also measured patient's health literacy, subjective and objective numeracy, and graph literacy. RESULTS: Judgments about hypertension data presented as a smoothed graph were significantly more positive (ie, hypertension deemed to be better controlled) then judgments about the same data presented as either a data table or an unsmoothed graph. Hypertension data viewed in tabular form was perceived more positively than graphs of the raw data. Data visualization had the greatest impact on participants with high graph literacy. DISCUSSION: Data visualization can direct patients to attend to more clinically meaningful information, thereby improving their judgments of hypertension control. However, patients with lower graph literacy may still have difficulty accessing important information from data visualizations. CONCLUSION: Addressing uncertainty inherent in the variability between BP measurements is an important consideration in visualization design. Well-designed data visualization could help to alleviate clinical uncertainty, one of the key drivers of clinical inertia and uncontrolled hypertension.

Quality of life and functional outcomes after in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation. A systematic review.

AIM: Our aim was to determine the association of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for in hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) with quality of life after discharge. METHODS: We performed a systematic review using available databases for studies that measured any quality-of-life or functional outcome both before and after CPR for IHCA. All screening and data abstraction was performed in duplicate. RESULTS: We screened 10,927 records and included 24 papers representing 20 unique studies. Fifteen studies measured Cerebral Performance Category. Survival ranged from 11.8% to 39.5%. The risk of impaired cerebral function after discharged ranged from -16.1% (lower risk) to 44.7% increased risk of poor cerebral function after surviving to discharge. Four studies measured discharge to an institutional environment finding that the risk was increased by 18.2-72.2% among survivors. One study measured EQ-5D and found no difference pre and post CPR. One study measured performance of activities of daily living finding that survivors needed assistance with more activities after discharge. CONCLUSION: Our review is limited by the lack of adjustment for confounders, including the baseline level of each outcome, in all included studies. Therefore, although risk for most outcomes was increased after discharge vs pre-admission we cannot be certain if this is a causal relationship.

HeartFull: Feasibility of an Integrated Program of Care for Patients with Advanced Stage of Heart Failure.

INTRODUCTION: Patients at an advanced stage of heart failure (AHF), specifically chronic severe symptomatic heart failure defined as New York Heart Association III/IV with hospitalization in the year prior, have high mortality, healthcare utilization, and low palliative care involvement. OBJECTIVES: The primary objectives were to determine the feasibility of recruiting patients and engaging cardiology and palliative healthcare providers in a program of integrated care for AHF (HeartFull); the proportion of patients who died in non-acute care settings. Secondary objectives were to describe patient-reported outcomes and pre-post comparison of healthcare utilization. METHODS: Patients were recruited from an urban academic hospital with expert heart failure care and a 24/7 inpatient and home palliative service. Utilization, disposition, and surveys were collected monthly for up to 20 months. RESULTS: Of 46 patients referred, 30 (65%) agreed to participate, 27 died during the study period, 19 (70%) died in non-acute care settings, while 8 (30%) died in hospital. We found no significant difference in pre- and post-intervention rates of hospitalization (RR .715; CI .360, 1.388; P = .3180), nor emergency visits (RR .678; CI .333, 1.338; P = .2590), but both trended downward. No significant changes were observed in patient-reported outcomes. CONCLUSION: In an urban academic hospital with palliative care, it was feasible to implement an integrated program for AHF. Patients died at home or in a palliative care unit at rates similar to palliative oncology patients and at higher rates than the general AHF population. HeartFull is now part of clinical practice.

The Impact of 4 Risk Communication Interventions on Cancer Screening Preferences and Knowledge.

PURPOSE: The US Preventive Services Task Force has changed their screening recommendations, encouraging informed patient choice and shared decision making as a result of emerging evidence. We aimed to compare the impact of a didactic intervention, a descriptive harms intervention, a narrative intervention, and a new risk communication strategy titled Aiding Risk Information learning through Simulated Experience (ARISE) on preferences for a hypothetical beneficial cancer screening test (one that reduces the chance of cancer death or extends life) versus a hypothetical screening test with no proven physical benefits. METHOD: A total of 3386 men and women aged 40 to 70 completed an online survey about prostate or breast cancer screening. Participants were randomly assigned to either an unbeneficial test condition (0 lives saved due to screening) or a beneficial test condition (1 life saved due to screening). Participants then reviewed 4 informational interventions about either breast (women) or prostate (men) cancer screening. First, participants were provided didactic information alongside an explicit recommendation. This was followed by a descriptive harms intervention in which the possible harms of overdetection were explained. Participants then viewed 2 additional interventions: a narrative and ARISE (an intervention in which participants learned about probabilities by viewing simulated outcomes). The order of these last 2 interventions was randomized. Preference for being screened with the test and knowledge about the test were measured. RESULTS: With each successive intervention, preferences for screening tests decreased an equivalent amount for both a beneficial and unbeneficial test. Knowledge about the screening tests was largely unimpacted by the interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Presenting detailed risk and benefit information, narratives, and ARISE reduced preferences for screening regardless of the net public benefit of screening.

RELIEF: A Digital Health Tool for the Remote Self-Reporting of Symptoms in Patients with Cancer to Address Palliative Care Needs and Minimize Emergency Department Visits.

The lack of timely symptom reporting remains a barrier to effective symptom management and comfort for patients with cancer-related palliative care needs. Poor symptom management at home can lead to unwanted outcomes, such as emergency department visits and death in hospital. We developed and evaluated RELIEF, a remote symptom self-reporting app for community patients with palliative care needs. A pilot feasibility study was conducted at a large, community hospital in Ontario, Canada. Patients self-reported their symptoms each morning using validated clinical symptom measures and RELIEF would alert for worsening or severe symptoms. RELIEF alerts were monitored by palliative care nurses who would then contact patients to determine if appropriate clinical intervention could be initiated to avoid unnecessary emergency department visits. A total of 20 patients were recruited to use RELIEF for two months. Patients completed 80% of daily self-report assessments; 133 alerts were trigged, half of which required clinical intervention. No patient visited the emergency department for symptom management during the study. Clinical staff estimated five emergency department visits were avoided because of RELIEF-saving an estimated cost of over CAD 60,000. RELIEF is a feasible and acceptable method for the remote monitoring of patients with palliative care needs through regular symptom self-reporting.

Qualitative Evaluation of a Novel Educational Tool to Communicate Individualized Hip Fracture Prognostic Information to Patients and Surrogates: My Hip Fracture (My-HF).

INTRODUCTION: Mortality and morbidity are high for older adults after hip fracture (HF), but patients and surrogate decision makers (SDMs) are typically unaware of the poor prognosis. We developed a novel educational tool, My Hip Fracture (My-HF), to provide patients and SDMs of patients hospitalized with acute HF individualized estimates of their post-HF prognosis. We conducted initial usability testing of My-HF in a sample of patients with HF and SDMs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: My-HF provides information about: 1) anatomy and risk factors for HF; 2) Hip fracture treatment received; 3) individualized predicted risk of adverse events and 4) anticipated discharge trajectory. We conducted a qualitative usability study using a convenience sample of hospitalized, post-operative patients with acute HF or SDMs of patients who lacked decision-making capacity. We used semi-structured interviews to obtain feedback. Thematic analysis was used to identify themes and concepts. RESULTS: We conducted interviews with 8 patients and 9 SDMs (mean age of interviewees 70.1 years, 41% female). My-HF was generally well received. Thematic analysis identified legibility and visual appeal, comprehension, numeracy, utility and reflection as prominent themes. Most respondents found My-HF to be useful in improving their understanding of HF and as a potential mechanism for sharing information with other care team members (including family and professionals). Suggestions for improvement of legibility, presentation of the individualized prognosis information and content were identified. DISCUSSION: Patients and SDMs are generally accepting of My-HF and found it useful for communicating individualized prognostic information. Feedback identified areas for improvement for future iterations of the tool. CONCLUSION: My-HF presents a means of addressing the gap in understanding of prognosis post-HF as a part of patient-centered care. Further evaluation will be needed to assess the impact of My-HF on patient and SDM reported outcomes as we transition from a paper to smart-phone enabled web application.

Home blood pressure data visualization for the management of hypertension: using human factors and design principles.

BACKGROUND: Home blood pressure measurements have equal or even greater predictive value than clinic blood pressure measurements regarding cardiovascular outcomes. With advances in home blood pressure monitors, we face an imminent flood of home measurements, but current electronic health record systems lack the functionality to allow us to use this data to its fullest. We designed a data visualization display for blood pressure measurements to be used for shared decision making around hypertension. METHODS: We used an iterative, rapid-prototyping, user-centred design approach to determine the most appropriate designs for this data display. We relied on visual cognition and human factors principles when designing our display. Feedback was provided by expert members of our multidisciplinary research team and through a series of end-user focus groups, comprised of either hypertensive patients or their healthcare providers required from eight academic, community-based practices in the Midwest of the United States. RESULTS: A total of 40 participants were recruited to participate in patient (N = 16) and provider (N = 24) focus groups. We describe the conceptualization and development of data display for shared decision making around hypertension. We designed and received feedback from both patients and healthcare providers on a number of design elements that were reported to be helpful in understanding blood pressure measurements. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a data display for substantial amounts of blood pressure measurements that is both simple to understand for patients, but powerful enough to inform clinical decision making. The display used a line graph format for ease of understanding, a LOWESS function for smoothing data to reduce the weight users placed on outlier measurements, colored goal range bands to allow users to quickly determine if measurements were in range, a medication timeline to help link recorded blood pressure measurements with the medications a patient was taking. A data display such as this, specifically designed to encourage shared decision making between hypertensive patients and their healthcare providers, could help us overcome the clinical inertia that often results in a lack of treatment intensification, leading to better care for the 35 million Americans with uncontrolled hypertension.

Emergency care with lay responders in underserved populations: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the individual and community health effects of task shifting for emergency care in low-resource settings and underserved populations worldwide. METHODS: We systematically searched 13 databases and additional grey literature for studies published between 1984 and 2019. Eligible studies involved emergency care training for laypeople in underserved or low-resource populations, and any quantitative assessment of effects on the health of individuals or communities. We conducted duplicate assessments of study eligibility, data abstraction and quality. We synthesized findings in narrative and tabular format. FINDINGS: Of 19 308 papers retrieved, 34 studies met the inclusion criteria from low- and middle-income countries (21 studies) and underserved populations in high-income countries (13 studies). Targeted emergency conditions included trauma, burns, cardiac arrest, opioid poisoning, malaria, paediatric communicable diseases and malnutrition. Trainees included the general public, non-health-care professionals, volunteers and close contacts of at-risk populations, all trained through in-class, peer and multimodal education and public awareness campaigns. Important clinical and policy outcomes included improvements in community capacity to manage emergencies (14 studies), patient outcomes (13 studies) and community health (seven studies). While substantial effects were observed for programmes to address paediatric malaria, trauma and opioid poisoning, most studies reported modest effect sizes and two reported null results. Most studies were of weak (24 studies) or moderate quality (nine studies). CONCLUSION: First aid education and task shifting to laypeople for emergency care may reduce patient morbidity and mortality and build community capacity to manage health emergencies for a variety of emergency conditions in underserved and low-resource settings.

Conceptual framework for task shifting and task sharing: an international Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Task shifting and sharing (TS/S) involves the redistribution of health tasks within workforces and communities. Conceptual frameworks lay out the key factors, constructs, and variables involved in a given phenomenon, as well as the relationships between those factors. Though TS/S is a leading strategy to address health worker shortages and improve access to services worldwide, a conceptual framework for this approach is lacking. METHODS: We used an online Delphi process to engage an international panel of scholars with experience in knowledge synthesis concerning TS/S and develop a conceptual framework for TS/S. We invited 55 prospective panelists to participate in a series of questionnaires exploring the purpose of TS/S and the characteristics of contexts amenable to TS/S programmes. Panelist responses were analysed and integrated through an iterative process to achieve consensus on the elements included in the conceptual framework. RESULTS: The panel achieved consensus concerning the included concepts after three Delphi rounds among 15 panelists. The COATS Framework (Concepts and Opportunities to Advance Task Shifting and Task Sharing) offers a refined definition of TS/S and a general purpose statement to guide TS/S programmes. COATS describes that opportunities for health system improvement arising from TS/S programmes depending on the implementation context, and enumerates eight necessary conditions and important considerations for implementing TS/S programmes. CONCLUSION: The COATS Framework offers a conceptual model for TS/S programmes. The COATS Framework is comprehensive and adaptable, and can guide refinements in policy, programme development, evaluation, and research to improve TS/S globally.

mHOMR: a prospective observational study of an automated mortality prediction model to identify patients with unmet palliative needs.

OBJECTIVE: Identification of patients with shortened life expectancy is a major obstacle to delivering palliative/end-of-life care. We previously developed the modified Hospitalised-patient One-year Mortality Risk (mHOMR) model for the automated identification of patients with an elevated 1-year mortality risk. Our goal was to investigate whether patients identified by mHOMR at high risk for mortality in the next year also have unmet palliative needs. METHOD: We conducted a prospective observational study at two quaternary healthcare facilities in Toronto, Canada, with patients admitted to general internal medicine service and identified by mHOMR to have an expected 1-year mortality risk of 10% or more. We measured patients' unmet palliative needs-a severe uncontrolled symptom on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale or readiness to engage in advance care planning (ACP) based on Sudore's ACP Engagement Survey. RESULTS: Of 518 patients identified by mHOMR, 403 (78%) patients consented to participate; 87% of those had either a severe uncontrolled symptom or readiness to engage in ACP, and 44% had both. Patients represented frailty (38%), cancer (28%) and organ failure (28%) trajectories were admitted for a median of 6 days, and 94% survived to discharge. CONCLUSIONS: A large majority of hospitalised patients identified by mHOMR have unmet palliative needs, regardless of disease, and are identified early enough in their disease course that they may benefit from a palliative approach to their care. Adoption of such a model could improve the timely introduction of a palliative approach for patients, especially those with non-cancer illness.

A Clinical Communication Tool (Loop) for Team-Based Care in Pediatric and Adult Care Settings: Hybrid Mixed Methods Implementation Study.

BACKGROUND: Communication within the circle of care is central to coordinated, safe, and effective care; yet patients, caregivers, and health care providers often experience poor communication and fragmented care. Through a sequential program of research, the Loop Research Collaborative developed a web-based, asynchronous clinical communication system for team-based care. Loop assembles the circle of care centered on a patient, in private networking spaces called Patient Loops. The patient, their caregiver, or both are part of the Patient Loop. The communication is threaded, it can be filtered and sorted in multiple ways, it is securely stored, and can be exported for upload to a medical record. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to implement and evaluate Loop. The study reporting adheres to the Standards for Reporting Implementation Research. METHODS: The study was a hybrid type II mixed methods design to simultaneously evaluate Loop's clinical and implementation effectiveness, and implementation barriers and facilitators in 6 health care sites. Data included monthly user check-in interviews and bimonthly surveys to capture patient or caregiver experience of continuity of care, in-depth interviews to explore barriers and facilitators based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), and Loop usage extracted directly from the Loop system. RESULTS: We recruited 25 initiating health care providers across 6 sites who then identified patients or caregivers for recruitment. Of 147 patient or caregiver participants who were assessed and met screening criteria, 57 consented and 52 were enrolled on Loop, creating 52 Patient Loops. Across all Patient Loops, 96 additional health care providers consented to join the Loop teams. Loop usage was followed for up to 8 months. The median number of messages exchanged per team was 1 (range 0-28). The monthly check-in and CFIR interviews showed that although participants acknowledged that Loop could potentially fill a gap, existing modes of communication, workflows, incentives, and the lack of integration with the hospital electronic medical records and patient portals were barriers to its adoption. While participants acknowledged Loop's potential value for engaging the patient and caregiver, and for improving communication within the patient's circle of care, Loop's relative advantage was not realized during the study and there was insufficient tension for change. Missing data limited the analysis of continuity of care. CONCLUSIONS: Fundamental structural and implementation challenges persist toward realizing Loop's potential as a shared system of asynchronous communication. Barriers include health information system integration; system, organizational, and individual tension for change; and a fee structure for health care provider compensation for asynchronous communication.

Comparison of Palliative Care Delivery in the Last Year of Life Between Adults With Terminal Noncancer Illness or Cancer.

Importance: Palliative care improves health outcomes, but studies of the differences in the delivery of palliative care to patients with different types of serious illness are lacking. Objective: To examine the delivery of palliative care among adults in their last year of life who died of terminal noncancer illness compared with those who died of cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study used linked health administrative data of adults who received palliative care in their last year of life and died between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2017, in Ontario, Canada. Exposures: Cause of death (chronic organ failure, dementia, or cancer). Main Outcomes and Measures: Components of palliative care delivery, including timing and location of initiation, model of care, physician mix, care settings, and location of death. Results: A total of 145 709 adults received palliative care (median age, 78 years; interquartile range, 67-86 years; 50.7% female); 21 054 died of chronic organ failure (4704 of heart failure, 5715 of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 3785 of end-stage kidney disease, 579 of cirrhosis, and 6271 of stroke), 14 033 died of dementia, and 110 622 died of cancer. Palliative care was initiated earlier (>90 days before death) in patients with cancer (32 010 [28.9%]) than in those with organ failure (3349 [15.9%]; absolute difference, 13.0%) or dementia (2148 [15.3%]; absolute difference, 13.6%). A lower proportion of patients with cancer had palliative care initiated in the home (16 088 [14.5%]) compared with patients with chronic organ failure (6904 [32.8%]; absolute difference, -18.3%) or dementia (3922 [27.9%]; absolute difference, -13.4%). Patients with cancer received palliative care across multiple care settings (92 107 [83.3%]) more often than patients with chronic organ failure (12 061 [57.3%]; absolute difference, 26.0%) or dementia (7553 [53.8%]; absolute difference, 29.5%). Palliative care was more often delivered to patients with cancer (80 615 [72.9%]) using a consultative or specialist instead of a generalist model compared with patients with chronic organ failure (9114 [43.3%]; absolute difference, 29.6%) or dementia (5634 [40.1%]; absolute difference, 32.8%). Patients with cancer (42 718 [38.6%]) received shared palliative care more often from general practitioners and physicians with subspecialty training, compared with patients with chronic organ failure (3599 [17.1%]; absolute difference, 21.5%) or dementia (1989 [14.2%]; absolute difference, 24.4%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, there were substantial patient- and practitioner-level differences in the delivery of palliative care across distinct types of serious illness. These patient- and practitioner-level differences have important implications for the organization and scaled implementation of palliative care programs, including enhancement of practitioner education and training and improvements in equitable access to care across all settings.

Quality versus risk of bias assessment of palliative care trials: comparison of two tools.

BACKGROUND: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of palliative care interventions are challenging to conduct and evaluate. Tools used to judge the quality of RCTs do not account for the complexities of conducting research in seriously ill populations and may artificially downgrade confidence in palliative care research. OBJECTIVE: To compare assessments from the Palliative Care Trial Assessment Tool (PCTAT) and Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB) tool. DESIGN: Reviewers assessed 43 RCTs using PCTAT and RoB. We compared assessments of each trial, assessed overall agreement (weighted kappa (Kw)) and examined (dis)agreement for comparable items. We assessed quality of life at 1-3 months among trials grouped according to RoB or PCTAT score (using meta-analysis) and whether RoB or quality improved over time (Cochran-Armitage trend test). RESULTS: Of 43 trials, those rated low RoB had a mean PCTAT score of 73 (SD 10); those rated high RoB had a mean PCTAT score of 56 (SD 14). Overall Kw was 0.33 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.42). Total agreement between comparable items was observed for 56% of trials (24/43) and total disagreement for 21% (8/43). The standardised mean difference in quality of life was statistically significant among RCTs with low RoB and high PCTAT, but not for those with medium/low PCTAT or high/unclear RoB. Quality of reporting improved over time, whereas RoB did not. CONCLUSION: Although there was fair agreement between tools, areas of disagreement/non-comparability suggest the tools capture different aspects of bias/quality. A specific tool to evaluate quality of palliative care trials may be warranted.

"No thanks, I don't want to see snakes again": a qualitative study of pain management versus preservation of cognition in palliative care patients.

BACKGROUND: Towards the end of life, use of opioid analgesics becomes more common in patients to control pain and improve quality of life. While pain medication may help manage pain, unwanted cognitive side effects are frequently noted. This balancing act presents a trade-off for patients between pain relief and adverse effects, where the desire to relieve pain must be evaluated against the desire to maintain cognitive clarity and may represent a difficult decision for patients receiving palliative care. Our goal was to understand how patients' decision making about pain medications balances the pain relief from those medications against the cognitive decline often associated with them. METHODS: We conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews with patients receiving home-based palliative care from a program in Toronto, Canada. Interview recordings were transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-one interviews were conducted. Some patients preferred cognitive preservation over pain management because of a sense that cognition is central to their identity, the desire to maintain lucidity, a desire to continue participating in work or hobbies, and fear of addiction. Conversely, some patients preferred pain management over cognitive preservation because of a desire to avoid suffering, an inability to sleep without medications, or an acceptance of some cognitive compromise. A few patients attempted to find balance through tapering drugs, limiting their use of breakthrough analgesic doses, or using alternative strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Decision making around pain and pain management is a highly preference-sensitive process-with no clear right or wrong decisions, only the preferences of each patient. The findings from this study may influence the design of future patient-facing decision aids around pain management. Future studies should pilot interventions to better assist patients with this decision.