Nursing Home Star Ratings and End-Of-Life Care Quality: Lessons Learned From the Veterans Health Administration.

OBJECTIVES: More than 25% of deaths among older adults occur in nursing homes. Thus, assessments of nursing home quality, including the widely used 5-star rating systems, should reflect quality of end-of-life (EOL) care. Our objective was to examine the associations between Veterans Affairs (VA) nursing home star ratings and quality of EOL care as measured by the VA's Bereaved Family Survey (BFS). DESIGN: National, retrospective observational study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: VA nursing homes, known as Community Living Centers (CLCs). All veterans who died in a CLC from October 2018 to September 2019 whose next of kin completed a BFS. METHODS: Using linked VA data sources, we examined the BFS-Performance Measure (BFS-PM) (ie, the % of BFS respondents who provided an "excellent" overall rating) by the Overall Star Rating and domain star ratings (unannounced survey, staffing, and quality) for the 133 CLCs in our sample. Logistic and linear regression was used to examine the associations between CLC Overall Star Rating and individual-level BFS outcomes. Outcomes included the BFS-PM (primary), the 3 BFS factor scores of Respectful Care and Communication, Emotional and Spiritual Support, and Death Benefits, and 2 symptom management items. RESULTS: Differences in the BFS-PM by CLC star rating were small to none and not statistically significant across all star rating domains. The relationship between a higher CLC Overall Star Rating and odds of an "excellent" BFS global rating was not statistically significant. Similarly, no significant associations were observed between a higher CLC Overall Star Rating and scores on the BFS factor scores and symptom management items. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Our findings suggest that the current CLC star rating system is not sufficient to assess the quality of EOL care. BFS scores, or a comparative EOL quality of care measure, should be integrated into CLC quality rating systems.

Preliminary effects of a yoga intervention for lung cancer dyads: benefits for care partners.

PURPOSE: Lung cancer is a disease with high mortality and morbidity, impacting both the patient and their closest contact, referred to in this paper as their care partner. There is limited evidence on how to support mental health and quality of life (QOL) for patient-care partner dyads during cancer treatment. This pilot study examines yoga as an intervention to improve well-being for the dyad. METHODS: A single-group, 12-week pilot trial of yoga for patients and their care partners recruited from two hospitals during cancer treatment (N = 23 patient-partner dyads or 46 individuals). Most care partners were spouses (70%), with the remainder being adult children (22%), a sibling (4%), or a friend (4%). Descriptive statistics, Cohen's d effect sizes, and paired t-tests for validated psychosocial measures were calculated at baseline and 12 weeks. RESULTS: Sixty-five percent of dyads (N = 13) completed the study, with withdrawals mostly due to disease progression. Among care partners, there was a decrease in depression symptomology on the PHQ-8 (p = 0.015, Cohen's d = 0.96) and improvement in QOL on the Caregiver QOL-Cancer scale (p = 0.001, Cohen's d = 0.61). Fifty percent of dyads experienced concordant improvement in depressive symptoms and 77% in QOL. CONCLUSION: Patient-partner yoga is a promising intervention for improving mental health and QOL for patient-partner dyads among lung cancer survivors. This study demonstrates yoga to be acceptable, feasible, and with high concordance within patient-partner dyads for improvements in QOL. Yoga shows promise for patients and care partners to alleviate the negative psychosocial impacts of lung cancer, though more research is needed to confirm effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03649737, 12/9/2020.

TEMPORARY REMOVAL: Opportunities to Improve End-of-Life Care Quality among Patients with Short Terminal Admissions.

The Publisher regrets that this article has been temporarily removed. A replacement will appear as soon as possible in which the reason for the removal of the article will be specified, or the article will be reinstated. The full Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal can be found at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy.

Lung Cancer Survival Trends in the Veterans Health Administration.

INTRODUCTION: Lung cancer survival is improving in the United States. We investigated whether there was a similar trend within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), the largest integrated healthcare system in the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from the Veterans Affairs Central Cancer Registry were analyzed for temporal survival trends using Kaplan-Meier estimates and linear regression. RESULTS: A total number of 54,922 Veterans were identified with lung cancer diagnosed from 2010 to 2017. Histologies were classified as non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (64.2%), small cell lung cancer (SCLC) (12.9%), and 'other' (22.9%). The proportion with stage I increased from 18.1% to 30.4%, while stage IV decreased from 38.9% to 34.6% (both P < .001). The 3-year overall survival (OS) improved for stage I (58.6% to 68.4%, P < .001), stage II (35.5% to 48.4%, P < .001), stage III (18.7% to 29.4%, P < .001), and stage IV (3.4% to 7.8%, P < .001). For NSCLC, the median OS increased from 12 to 21 months (P < .001), and the 3-year OS increased from 24.1% to 38.3% (P < .001). For SCLC, the median OS remained unchanged (8 to 9 months, P = .10), while the 3-year OS increased from 9.1% to 12.3% (P = .014). Compared to White Veterans, Black Veterans with NSCLC had similar OS (P = .81), and those with SCLC had higher OS (P = .003). CONCLUSION: Lung cancer survival is improving within the VHA. Compared to White Veterans, Black Veterans had similar or higher survival rates. The observed racial equity in outcomes within a geographically and socioeconomically diverse population warrants further investigation to better understand and replicate this achievement in other healthcare systems.

Criteria for Enrollment of Patients With COPD in Palliative Care Trials: A Systematic Review.

CONTEXT: Use of palliative care interventions in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has increased in recent years and inclusion criteria used to identify patients with COPD appropriate for palliative care vary widely. We evaluated the inclusion criteria to identify ways to improve enrollment opportunities for patients with COPD. OBJECTIVES: To determine inclusion criteria used to select patients with COPD for palliative care trials. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted to determine criteria used to select patients with COPD for palliative care randomized controlled trials. A narrative synthesis was conducted for all trials. RESULTS: Inclusion criteria were highly heterogeneous. Most studies (n = 11, 79%) used a combination of criteria to identify patients with COPD. Commonly used criteria included hospitalization for an acute exacerbation of COPD (n = 8, 57%), home supplemental oxygen use (n = 8, 57%), and spirometry values confirming COPD (n = 6, 43%). Three studies (21.4%) used Modified Medical Research Council score and two studies (21%) used physician prognosis or a performance scale. CONCLUSION: The most common criteria, a hospitalization for acute exacerbation of COPD or supplemental oxygen use at home, both have the benefit of selecting patients who have a higher symptom burden or higher healthcare utilization who might therefore benefit more from palliative care. By describing the landscape and variability of previously used inclusion criteria, this article serves as a resource for clinicians and researchers. Developing a consistent set of inclusion criteria in the future would help generate generalizable results that can be translated into clinical practice to improve the lives of patients with COPD. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022306752.

Nurse-Led, Telephone-Based Primary Palliative Care Intervention for Patients With Lung Cancer: Domains of Quality Care.

Palliative care is traditionally delivered by specialty-trained palliative care teams. Because of a national workforce shortage of palliative care specialists, there is an urgent need to explore alternative models of palliative care delivery to meet the needs of patients living with serious illness. As part of a multisite randomized controlled trial, 2 registered nurses without previous palliative care experience were trained to deliver a primary palliative care intervention to patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer. The intervention focused on assessing and managing symptoms, psychosocial needs, education, and initiating goals-of-care discussions. The primary outcome, improved symptom burden and quality of life, was not statistically significant. Despite this finding, nurses addressed 5 of the 8 National Consensus Project Guidelines domains of quality palliative care: structure and processes of care; physical, psychological, and social aspects of care; and ethical and legal aspects. Patients' engagement in goals-of-care discussions, a measure of high-quality palliative care, increased. Clinical recommendations offered by the nurses to the patients' clinicians were addressed and accepted on a timely basis. Most patients rated satisfaction with the intervention as "very or extremely" satisfied. These findings may inform future nurse-led palliative care interventions on the specific quality domains of palliative care.

Defining the Time-limited Trial for Patients with Critical Illness: An Official American Thoracic Society Workshop Report.

In critical care, the specific, structured approach to patient care known as a "time-limited trial" has been promoted in the literature to help patients, surrogate decision makers, and clinicians navigate consequential decisions about life-sustaining therapy in the face of uncertainty. Despite promotion of the time-limited trial approach, a lack of consensus about its definition and essential elements prevents optimal clinical use and rigorous evaluation of its impact. The objectives of this American Thoracic Society Workshop Committee were to establish a consensus definition of a time-limited trial in critical care, identify the essential elements for conducting a time-limited trial, and prioritize directions for future work. We achieved these objectives through a structured search of the literature, a modified Delphi process with 100 interdisciplinary and interprofessional stakeholders, and iterative committee discussions. We conclude that a time-limited trial for patients with critical illness is a collaborative plan among clinicians and a patient and/or their surrogate decision makers to use life-sustaining therapy for a defined duration, after which the patient's response to therapy informs the decision to continue care directed toward recovery, transition to care focused exclusively on comfort, or extend the trial's duration. The plan's 16 essential elements follow four sequential phases: consider, plan, support, and reassess. We acknowledge considerable gaps in evidence about the impact of time-limited trials and highlight a concern that if inadequately implemented, time-limited trials may perpetuate unintended harm. Future work is needed to better implement this defined, specific approach to care in practice through a person-centered equity lens and to evaluate its impact on patients, surrogates, and clinicians.

Perspectives on advance care planning needs of persons with advanced dementia from their surrogates and clinicians.

Objectives: This study was designed to understand the experience and needs surrounding advance care planning (ACP) discussions for surrogate decision-makers of persons with advanced dementia (PWAD). Methods: Semi-structured qualitative interviews based on end-of-life communication models with a convenience sample of 17 clinicians, and 15 surrogates of PWAD. We used a hybrid approach of deductive and inductive thematic analysis. Results: Two main themes emerged. 1)Deficits in communication: Often surrogates did not fully comprehend the disease trajectory or medical treatments, like the likelihood of pneumonia and use of mechanical ventilation, nor concepts related to ACP, particularly legal documents and orders such as Do Not Hospitalize, which made decision-making challenging as perceived by clinicians. 2)Decision-making conflicts: Clinicians perceived a disconnect between surrogates' understanding of their loved one's preferences and knowing how or when to operationalize them. Conclusions: Significant gaps in knowledge surrounding disease trajectory and complications, such as pneumonia, and aspects of ACP, exist. These gaps create decision-making challenges for surrogates and clinicians alike. Innovation: This study assessed both clinicians and surrogate decision-makers' perspectives on communication and decision-making concerning care preferences, goals, and ACP. The study findings from a national cohort can inform decision-support interventions for clinicians and surrogate decision-makers of PWAD.

Goals of care and end-of-life communication needs of persons with chronic respiratory disease.

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW: To highlight recent advances in effective communication among persons with chronic respiratory diseases. The authors focus on communication science related to goals of care (GOC) discussions, medical devices, and life-sustaining invasive treatments. The authors discuss important considerations when working with individuals with low literacy and rurality. Communication handoffs between respiratory clinicians and/or palliative care to hospice clinicians are summarized to ensure effective person-centered and caregiver-centered care. RECENT FINDINGS: Studies suggest the following communication approaches: (1) clarify differences between palliative and end of life; (2) conduct conversations early and gradual throughout the illness trajectory; (3) distinguish types of GOC discussions as they relate to treatment preferences; (4) for patients from rural communities, include family members and spiritual leaders; (5) assess literacy and employ supportive strategies; (6) apply time-limited-trial framework for life-sustaining treatment (LST) decisions; and (7) standardize processes for communication handoffs to hospice clinicians to improve communication fidelity. SUMMARY: Effective communication tools for clinicians to engage in GOC discussions for persons with chronic respiratory diseases are grounded in a patient-centered framework. A trained clinician should lead these conversations and include interdisciplinary team members throughout the disease trajectory including at the end of life. These approaches may enable patients to express their values and care preferences as they evolve over time.

Integrating evidence-based communication principles into routine cancer care.

PURPOSE: The global incidence of cancer and available cancer-directed therapy options is increasing rapidly, presenting patients and clinicians with more complex treatment decisions than ever before. Despite the dissemination of evidence-based communication training tools and programs, clinicians cite barriers to employing effective communication in cancer care (e.g., discomfort of sharing serious news, concern about resource constraints to meet stated needs). We present two composite cases with significant communication challenges to guide clinicians through an application of evidence-based approaches to achieve quality communication. METHODS: Composite cases, communication skills blueprint, and visual conceptualization. RESULTS: High-stakes circumstances in each case are described, including end-of-life planning, advanced pediatric illness, strong emotions, and health inequities. Three overarching communication approaches are discussed: (1) content selection and delivery; (2) rapport development; and (3) empathic connection. The key takeaways following each case provide succinct summaries of challenges encountered and approaches used. A communication blueprint from the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Communication Skills Training Program and Research Laboratory has been adapted and is comprised of strategies, skills, process tasks, and sample talking points. A visually concise tool - the Communication Blueprint Traffic Circle - illustrates these concepts and demonstrates the iterative, holistic, and agile considerations inherent to effective communication. CONCLUSION: Evidence-based communication is foundational to person-centeredness, associated with improved clinician and patient/caregiver outcomes, and can be integrated throughout routine oncology care. When used by clinicians, evidence-based communication can improve patient and caregiver experiences and assist in ensuring goal-concordant cancer care delivery.

Miscommunication in Cancer Care-Do You Hear What I Hear?

This Viewpoint identifies examples of bad communication from cancer clinicians toward patients as well as better methods for clinicians to use when communicating with patients with cancer.

Intersection of Palliative Care and Hospice Use Among Patients With Advanced Lung Cancer.

Background: Hospice and palliative care (PC) are important components of lung cancer care and independently provide benefits to patients and their families. Objective: To better understand the relationship between hospice and PC and factors that influence this relationship. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with advanced lung cancer (stage IIIB/IV) within the U.S. Veterans Health Administration (VA) from 2007 to 2013 with follow-up through 2017 (n = 22,907). Mixed logistic regression models with a random effect for site, adjustment for patient variables, and propensity score weighting were used to examine whether the association between PC and hospice use varied by U.S. region and PC team characteristics. Results: Overall, 57% of patients with lung cancer received PC, 69% received hospice, and 16% received neither. Of those who received hospice, 60% were already enrolled in PC. Patients who received PC had higher odds of hospice enrollment than patients who did not receive PC (adjusted odds ratio = 3.25, 95% confidence interval: 2.43-4.36). There were regional differences among patients who received PC; the predicted probability of hospice enrollment was 85% and 73% in the Southeast and Northeast, respectively. PC team and facility characteristics influenced hospice use in addition to PC; teams with the shortest duration of existence, with formal team training, and at lower hospital complexity were more likely to use hospice (all p < 0.05). Conclusions: Among patients with advanced lung cancer, PC was associated with hospice enrollment. However, this relationship varied by geographic region, and PC team and facility characteristics. Our findings suggest that regional PC resource availability may contribute to substitution effects between PC and hospice for end-of-life care.

Relationships among clinicians are crucial to successful palliative care integration: a qualitative study in lung cancer.

Aims: Palliative care integration improves quality of life among patients with lung cancer and their families. Despite these benefits, significant barriers persist and patients do not receive timely integration. This study sought to identify facilitators of and barriers to integration in lung cancer care. Materials & methods: Semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted with palliative care and lung cancer clinicians and analyzed using traditional content analysis. 23 clinicians were interviewed from geographically dispersed hospitals within a national healthcare system. Results: Palliative care integration improved over time, enhanced by several facilitators stratified at four levels (patient/clinician/hospital/organization). Most important among these was multidisciplinary care delivered in outpatient settings, fostering trust and relationships among clinicians which were pivotal to successful integration. Workforce shortages and limited use of primary palliative care among lung cancer clinicians need to be addressed for continued growth in the field. Conclusion: Relationships among clinicians are crucial to successful palliative care integration in lung cancer care.

Palliative care is a form of supportive care for patients with a serious illness that improves quality of life among patients with lung cancer and their families. Unfortunately, many patients do not receive this care until they are near the end of life. This study sought to explore clinicians' perspectives regarding ways to enhance the use of palliative care among patients with lung cancer. Using interviews of clinicians from geographically dispersed hospitals within a national healthcare system, the authors explored reasons and potential solutions to improve palliative care delivery. One of the most important factors in enhancing palliative care use was fostering trust and relationships among palliative care and lung cancer clinicians. Workforce shortages also need to be addressed for continued growth in the field of palliative care. Relationships among clinicians are crucial to successful palliative care integration in lung cancer care.

Association of Patient-Centered Elements of Care and Palliative Care Among Patients With Advanced Lung Cancer.

CONTEXT: Palliative care (PC) is associated with improved quality of life, survival, and decreased healthcare use at the end of life among lung cancer patients. However, the specific elements of palliative care that may contribute to these benefits are unclear. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the associations of PC and its setting of delivery with prescriptions of symptom management medications, advance care planning (ACP), hospice enrollment, and home health care (HHC) receipt. METHODS: Retrospective, cohort study of patients with advanced stage (IIIB/IV) lung cancer in the Veterans Health Administration (VA) diagnosed from 2007-2013; with follow-up through 2017. Propensity score methods were used with inverse probability of treatment weighting and logistic regression modeling, adjusting for patient and tumor characteristics. RESULTS: Among 23 142 patients, 57% received PC. Compared to non-receipt of PC, PC in any setting (inpatient or outpatient) was associated with increased prescriptions of pain medications (Adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) = 1.63, 95% CI: 1.45-1.83), constipation regimen with pain medications (aOR = 2.04, 95% CI: 1.63-2.54), and antidepressants (aOR = 1.78, 95% CI: 1.52-2.09). PC was also associated with increased ACP (aOR = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.37-1.67) and hospice enrollment (aOR = 1.39, 95% CI:1.31-1.47), and decreased HHC (aOR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.70-.90) compared to non-receipt of PC. Receipt of PC in outpatient settings was associated with increased prescriptions of pain medications (aOR = 2.54, 95% CI: 2.13-3.04) and antidepressants (aOR = 1.76, 95% CI: 1.46-2.12), and hospice enrollment (aOR = 2.09, 95% CI: 1.90-2.31) compared to receipt of PC in inpatient settings. CONCLUSIONS: PC is associated with increased use of symptom management medications, ACP, and hospice enrollment, especially when delivered in outpatient settings. These elements of care elucidate potential mechanisms for improved outcomes associated with PC and provide a framework for a primary palliative care approach among non-palliative care clinicians.

Advance Care Planning in Serious Illness: A Narrative Review.

CONTEXT: Advance care planning (ACP) intends to support person-centered medical decision-making by eliciting patient preferences. Research has not identified significant associations between ACP and goal-concordant end-of-life care, leading to justified scientific debate regarding ACP utility. OBJECTIVE: To delineate ACP's potential benefits and missed opportunities and identify an evidence-informed, clinically relevant path ahead for ACP in serious illness. METHODS: We conducted a narrative review merging the best available ACP empirical data, grey literature, and emergent scholarly discourse using a snowball search of PubMed, Medline, and Google Scholar (2000-2022). Findings were informed by our team's interprofessional clinical and research expertise in serious illness care. RESULTS: Early ACP practices were largely tied to mandated document completion, potentially failing to capture the holistic preferences of patients and surrogates. ACP models focused on serious illness communication rather than documentation show promising patient and clinician results. Ideally, ACP would lead to goal-concordant care even amid the unpredictability of serious illness trajectories. But ACP might also provide a false sense of security that patients' wishes will be honored and revisited at end-of-life. An iterative, 'building block' framework to integrate ACP throughout serious illness is provided alongside clinical practice, research, and policy recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: We advocate a balanced approach to ACP, recognizing empirical deficits while acknowledging potential benefits and ethical imperatives (e.g., fostering clinician-patient trust and shared decision-making). We support prioritizing patient/surrogate-centered outcomes with more robust measures to account for interpersonal clinician-patient variables that likely inform ACP efficacy and may better evaluate information gleaned during serious illness encounters.

Differences in US Regional Healthcare Allocation Guidelines During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Hospitals faced unprecedented scarcity of resources without parallel in modern times during the COVID-19 pandemic. This scarcity led healthcare systems and states to develop or modify scarce resource allocation guidelines that could be implemented during "crisis standards of care" (CSC). CSC describes a significant change in healthcare operations and the level of care provided during a public health emergency. OBJECTIVE: Our study provides a comprehensive examination of the latest CSC guidelines in the western region of the USA, where Alaska and Idaho declared CSC, focusing on ethical issues and health disparities. DESIGN: Mixed-methods survey study of physicians and/or ethicists and review of healthcare system and state allocation guidelines. PARTICIPANTS: Ten physicians and/or ethicists who participated in scarce resource allocation guideline development from seven healthcare systems or three state-appointed committees from the western region of the USA including Alaska, California, Idaho, Oregon, and California. RESULTS: All sites surveyed developed allocation guidelines, but only four (40%) were operationalized either statewide or for specific scarce resources. Most guidelines included comorbidities (70%), and half included adjustments for socioeconomic disadvantage (50%), while only one included specific priority groups (10%). Allocation tiebreakers included the life cycle principle and random number generators. Six guidelines evolved over time, removing restrictions such as age, severity of illness, and comorbidities. Additional palliative care (20%) and ethics (50%) resources were planned by some guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Allocation guidelines are essential to support clinicians during public health emergencies; however, significant deficits and differences in guidelines were identified that may perpetuate structural inequities and racism. While a universal triage protocol that is equally accepted by all communities is unlikely, the lack of regional agreement on standards with justification and transparency has the potential to erode public trust and perpetuate inequity.

Palliative Care Early in the Care Continuum among Patients with Serious Respiratory Illness: An Official ATS/AAHPM/HPNA/SWHPN Policy Statement.

Background: Patients with serious respiratory illness and their caregivers suffer considerable burdens, and palliative care is a fundamental right for anyone who needs it. However, the overwhelming majority of patients do not receive timely palliative care before the end of life, despite robust evidence for improved outcomes. Goals: This policy statement by the American Thoracic Society (ATS) and partnering societies advocates for improved integration of high-quality palliative care early in the care continuum for patients with serious respiratory illness and their caregivers and provides clinicians and policymakers with a framework to accomplish this. Methods: An international and interprofessional expert committee, including patients and caregivers, achieved consensus across a diverse working group representing pulmonary-critical care, palliative care, bioethics, health law and policy, geriatrics, nursing, physiotherapy, social work, pharmacy, patient advocacy, psychology, and sociology. Results: The committee developed fundamental values, principles, and policy recommendations for integrating palliative care in serious respiratory illness care across seven domains: 1) delivery models, 2) comprehensive symptom assessment and management, 3) advance care planning and goals of care discussions, 4) caregiver support, 5) health disparities, 6) mass casualty events and emergency preparedness, and 7) research priorities. The recommendations encourage timely integration of palliative care, promote innovative primary and secondary or specialist palliative care delivery models, and advocate for research and policy initiatives to improve the availability and quality of palliative care for patients and their caregivers. Conclusions: This multisociety policy statement establishes a framework for early palliative care in serious respiratory illness and provides guidance for pulmonary-critical care clinicians and policymakers for its proactive integration.