Citations

91 Background: Formal mechanisms to share data on quality remain immature in specialty palliative care. As the field grows, infrastructure that promotes collaboration among academic and community-based practice will be required to foster comparisons and benchmarking of data to inform areas for quality improvement. Further, such relationships will create a palliative care “quality improvement laboratory”, where proposed guidelines and best practices can be developed, implemented, and tested. Methods: We set out to bring together specialty palliative care practices with a shared vision for collaborative quality improvement. We modeled our approach after the Institute for Healthcare Improvement Breakthrough Series alongside our Rapid Learning Quality Improvement paradigm. We use a set of common data collection procedures, across an electronic point-of-care platform called Quality Data Collection Tool (QDACT), alongside a centralized data registry. Further, we meet and discuss challenges and issues, compare best practices, and brainstorm new projects through biweekly conference calls. Results: We have created a multi-institutional collaboration for quality assessment and improvement in specialty palliative care. Termed the Global Palliative Care Quality Alliance, we have brought together 11 academic and community organizations, both general and oncology-specific, across six states to study various areas of quality practice. Short-term, we will conduct rapid-cycling quality improvement projects addressing National Quality Forum domains for quality palliative care, including documentation of spiritual assessment and timely advance care planning. Long-term, we aim to study the link between quality measure adherence and outcomes and further align our initiatives with those of other large consortia, like the Palliative Care Research Cooperative and Palliative Care Quality Network. Conclusions: Collaborative quality improvement is needed in specialty palliative care across a national platform. Developing the infrastructure to perform standardized quality improvement is achievable across multiple palliative care settings.

Background— Despite the ability of left ventricular assist device as destination therapy (DT-LVAD) to prolong survival for many patients with advanced heart failure, little is known about the eventual end-of-life care that patients with DT-LVAD receive. Methods and Results— All patients undergoing DT-LVAD at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, from January 1, 2007, to September 30, 2014, who subsequently died before July 1, 2015, were included. Information about end-of-life care was obtained from documentation in the electronic medical record. Of 89 patients who died with a DT-LVAD, the median (25th–75th percentile) time from left ventricular assist device implantation to death was 14 (4–31) months. The most common causes of death were multiorgan failure (26%), hemorrhagic stroke (24%), and progressive heart failure (21%). Nearly half (46%) of the patients saw palliative care within 1 month before death; however, only 13 (15%) patients enrolled in hospice a median 11 (range 1–315) days before death. Most patients (78%) died in the hospital, of which 88% died in the intensive care unit. In total, 49 patients had their left ventricular assist device deactivated before death, with all but 3 undergoing deactivation in the hospital. Most patients died within an hour of left ventricular assist device deactivation and all within 26 hours. Conclusions— In contrast to the general heart failure population, most patients with DT-LVAD die in the hospital and few use hospice. Further work is needed to understand these differences and to determine whether patients with DT-LVAD are receiving optimal end-of-life care.

Context: Differences among patient populations that present to consultative palliative care are not known. Such an appreciation would inform health-care delivery tailored to unique populations. Objectives: We aimed to compare characteristics and palliative care needs of African Americans (AAs) and whites during initial palliative care consultation. Methods: We analyzed patient-reported, clinician-entered clinical encounter data from a large, multisite community-based, nonhospice palliative care collaborative. We included first specialty palliative care consultations from January 1, 2014, to July 2, 2015, across 15 sites within the Global Palliative Care Quality Alliance registry. Demographics, disease, performance status, advance care planning, and symptom prevalence/severity were compared. Results: Of 775 patients, 12.9% (N = 100) were AA. African Americans were younger (63 vs 75.4 years, P < .0001). A larger proportion of AAs had a diagnosis of cancer (45.0% vs 36.3%, P = .09) and in the hospital (71% vs 61.8%, P = .07). African Americans were more likely to have a Palliative Performance Score of 0 to 30 (35.6% vs 23.7%, P = .049). Around 50% in both racial groups were full code; slightly more than 40% had an advance directive. Nearly two-thirds in both racial groups reported 3 or more symptoms of any severity; one-third reported 3 or more moderate or severe symptoms. A larger proportion of Africans than whites reported pain of any severity (66.0% vs 56.1%, P = .06). Conclusion: All patients present to palliative care consultations with significant symptom and advance care planning needs. Further research is needed to identify how to deliver palliative care: earlier, in noncancer conditions, and improve pain management in AA populations.

Background: As heart failure often follows an unpredictable clinical trajectory, there has been an impetus to promote iterative patient-provider discussions regarding prognosis and preferences for end-of-life care. Aim: To examine clinicians’ practices, expectations, and personal level of confidence in discussing goals of care and providing end-of-life care to their patients with heart failure. Design: Multi-site clinician survey. Setting and Participants: Physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants at Mayo Clinic (Rochester, Minnesota, USA) and its surrounding health system were asked to participate in an electronic survey in October 2013. Tertiary Care Cardiology, Community Cardiology, and Primary Care clinicians were surveyed. Results: A total of 95 clinicians participated (52.5% response rate). Only 12% of clinicians reported having annual end-of-life discussions as advocated by the American Heart Association. In total, 52% of clinicians hesitated to discuss end-of-life care citing provider discomfort (11%), perception of patient (21%) or family (12%) unreadiness, fear of destroying hope (9%), or lack of time (8%). Tertiary and Community Cardiology clinicians (66%) attributed responsibility for end-of-life discussions to the heart failure cardiologist, while 66% of Primary Care clinicians felt it was their responsibility. Overall, 30% of clinicians reported a low or very low level of confidence in one or more of the following: initiating prognosis or end-of-life discussions, enrolling patients in hospice, or providing end-of-life care. Most clinicians expressed interest in further skills acquisition. Conclusion: Clinicians vary in their views and approaches to end-of-life discussions and care. Some lack confidence and most are interested in further skills acquisition.

We present the case of a 34-year-old woman with Klippel-Feil syndrome who developed progressive generalized dystonia of unclear etiology, resulting in intractable pain despite aggressive medical and surgical interventions. Ultimately, palliative sedation was required to relieve suffering. Herein, we describe ethical considerations including defining sedation, determining prognosis in the setting of an undefined neurodegenerative condition, and use of treatments that concurrently might prolong or alter end-of-life trajectory. We highlight pertinent literature and how it may be applied in challenging and unique clinical situations. Finally, we discuss the need for expert multidisciplinary involvement when implementing palliative sedation and illustrate that procedures and rules need to be interpreted to deliver optimal patient-centered plan of care.