Early Palliative Care Is Associated With Reduced Emergency Department Utilization in Pancreatic Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Most patients with pancreatic cancer have high symptom burden and poor outcomes. Palliative care (PC) can improve the quality of care through expert symptom management, although the optimal timing of PC referral is still poorly understood. We aimed to assess the association of early PC on health care utilization and charges of care for pancreatic cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We selected patients with pancreatic cancer diagnosed between 2000 and 2009 who received at least 1 PC encounter using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare. Patients who had unknown follow-up were excluded. We defined "early PC" if the patients received PC within 30 days of diagnosis. RESULTS: A total of 3166 patients had a PC encounter; 28% had an early PC. Patients receiving early PC were more likely to be female and have older age compared with patients receiving late PC (P<0.001). Patients receiving early PC had fewer emergency department (ED) visits (2.6 vs. 3.0 visits, P=0.004) and lower total charges of ED care ($3158 vs. $3981, P<0.001) compared with patients receiving late PC. Patients receiving early PC also had lower intensive care unit admissions (0.82 vs. 0.98 visits, P=0.006) and total charges of intensive care unit care ($14,466 vs. $18,687, P=0.01). On multivariable analysis, patients receiving early PC were significantly associated with fewer ED visits (P=0.007) and lower charges of ED care (P=0.018) for all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Early PC referrals were associated with lower ED visits and ED-related charges. Our findings support oncology society guideline recommendations for early PC in patients with advanced malignancies such as pancreatic cancer.

Trauma Surgeon and Palliative Care Physician Attitudes Regarding Goals-of-Care Delineation for Injured Geriatric Patients.

BACKGROUND: The value of defining goals of care (GoC) for geriatric patients is well known to the palliative care community but is a newer concept for many trauma surgeons. Palliative care specialists and trauma surgeons were surveyed to elicit the specialties' attitudes regarding (1) importance of GoC conversations for injured seniors; (2) confidence in their own specialty's ability to conduct these conversations; and (3) confidence in the ability of the other specialty to do so. METHODS: A 13-item survey was developed by the steering committee of a multicenter, palliative care-focused consortium and beta-tested by trauma surgeons and palliative care specialists unaffiliated with the consortium. The finalized instrument was electronically circulated to active physician members of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma and American Academy for Hospice and Palliative Medicine. RESULTS: Respondents included 118 trauma surgeons (8.8%) and 244 palliative care specialists (5.7%). Palliative physicians rated being more familiar with GoC, were more likely to report high-quality training in performing conversations, believed more palliative specialists were needed in intensive care units, and had more interest in conducting conversations relative to trauma surgeons. Both groups believed themselves to perform GoC discussions better than the other specialty perceived them to do so and favored their own specialty leading team discussions. CONCLUSIONS: Both groups believe themselves to conduct GoC discussions for injured seniors better than the other specialty perceived them to do so, which led to disparate views on the optimal leadership of these discussions.

Burn Surgeon and Palliative Care Physician Attitudes Regarding Goals of Care Delineation for Burned Geriatric Patients.

Palliative care specialists (PCS) and burn surgeons (BS) were surveyed regarding: 1) importance of goals of care (GoC) conversations for burned seniors; 2) confidence in their own specialty's ability to conduct these conversations; and 3) confidence in the ability of the other specialty to do so. A 13-item survey was developed by the steering committee of a multicenter consortium dedicated to palliative care in the injured geriatric patient and beta-tested by BS and PCS unaffiliated with the consortium. The finalized instrument was electronically circulated to active physician members of the American Burn Association and American Academy for Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Forty-five BS (7.3%) and 244 PCS (5.7%) responded. Palliative physicians rated being more familiar with GoC, were more comfortable having a discussion with laypeople, were more likely to have reported high-quality training in performing conversations, believed more palliative specialists were needed in intensive care units, and had more interest in conducting conversations relative to BS. Both groups believed themselves to perform GoC discussions better than the other specialty perceived them to do so. BS favored leading team discussions, whereas palliative specialists preferred jointly led discussions. Both groups agreed that discussions should occur within 72 hours of admission. Both groups believe themselves to conduct GoC discussions for burned seniors better than the other specialty perceived them to do so, which led to disparate views on perceptions for the optimal leadership of these discussions.