Observations from Optimizing an Electronic Order Set for Withdrawal of Life-Sustaining Treatment.

Background: Withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment (WLST) is a process with unique pressure for all involved. The use of an electronic order set can facilitate best care. Objective: To assess utilization of a WLST order set and time to inpatient death before and after optimization. Design: A retrospective chart review for 12-month periods before and after enhancements to a WLST order set. Setting/Subjects: Multicenter study within an American, not-for-profit health care system of inpatient decedents July 2017-June 2018 and April 2021-March 2022 with orders placed via WLST order set. Measurements: Co-primary outcomes included order set utilization and time from activation of orders to patient death. Descriptive post hoc analyses featured demographics, palliative consultation, ordering clinician type/specialty, and COVID-19. Results: A total of 1949 patients had orders placed via the WLST order set and died in-hospital. Compared with the 2017-2018 period, use increased 35.8% in 2021-2022. Time to death after release of orders was significantly longer for the 2021-2022 group (4.4 vs. 3.7 hours). Demographic details included nurse practitioners (39%) as most frequent WLST order set utilizer and palliative consultation in 46% of terminal hospitalizations. Among decedents with consultation, palliative clinicians were the WLST order set utilizer for 47% of cases (i.e., 21% of all WLST order set utilizations). The median time to death was significantly longer when orders were placed by a palliative clinician (4.5 hours) compared with nonpalliative specialists (3.9 hours). COVID-19 was a hospital diagnosis for 29% of decedents in the 2021-2022 group. Conclusions: In the emotionally and cognitively intense process that is WLST, an order set provides a modifiable panel of defaults. Our experience highlights the power in guiding primary palliative care for WLST in the hospital setting and suggests that advanced practice providers and nonpalliative clinicians, as primary utilizers, be integral in the design of a WLST order set.

Development of Entrustable Professional Activities for Specialist Hospice and Palliative Care Pharmacists.

CONTEXT: Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) translate competencies into explicit, practical terms that clearly state the expected roles and responsibilities of clinicians who have achieved proficiency and expertise in a field. EPAs are defined for Hospice and Palliative Medicine physicians but not for other members of Hospice and Palliative Care (HAPC) interprofessional teams, including pharmacists. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to develop EPAs for HAPC pharmacists. METHODS: An 11-member workgroup of HAPC pharmacists was convened to develop candidate EPAs using nominal group and modified-Delphi methods. Content validity index was used as a measure of consensus, defined a priori at ≥ 60%. Vetting occurred via intra- and interprofessional stakeholder reactor groups and a national survey of HAPC pharmacists. RESULTS: Following an iterative process of workgroup and stakeholder consensus-building, 15 HAPC pharmacist EPAs were developed. Among the workgroup, all 15 EPAs reached ≥ 70% consensus, indicating appropriate internal validity. In a national survey of 185 HAPC pharmacists with a 20% response rate, 13 EPAs were rated by most respondents as "essential" and 2 were rated by most respondents as "important but not essential." Respondents indicated the 15 EPA set represented the core professional activities of HAPC pharmacists well (median rating of 5 on a Likert-like scale, IQR 1). CONCLUSION: Fifteen consensus EPAs describe essential activities of HAPC pharmacists in direct patient care, leadership, education, and scholarship. These EPAs will further guide pharmacist training programs, HAPC services seeking to incorporate a specialized pharmacist on the team, and currently practicing HAPC pharmacists.

Acute Pain Management Pearls: A Focused Review for the Hospital Clinician.

Acute pain management is a challenging area encountered by inpatient clinicians every day. While patient care is increasingly complex and costly in this realm, the availability of applicable specialists is waning. This narrative review seeks to support diverse hospital-based healthcare providers in refining and updating their acute pain management knowledge base through clinical pearls and point-of-care resources. Practical guidance is provided for the design and adjustment of inpatient multimodal analgesic regimens, including conventional and burgeoning non-opioid and opioid therapies. The importance of customized care plans for patients with preexisting opioid tolerance, chronic pain, or opioid use disorder is emphasized, and current recommendations for inpatient management of associated chronic therapies are discussed. References to best available guidelines and literature are offered for further exploration. Improved clinician attention and more developed skill sets related to acute pain management could significantly benefit hospitalized patient outcomes and healthcare resource utilization.