Citations

Background: Shared Decision Making in palliative care encompassing patient-clinician collaboration has shown potential for improved patient outcomes. However, the impact of decision aids intended to support palliative care decision making discussions across clinical care settings remains uncertain. Aim: To assess the impact of shared of decision aids on decision making, clinical outcomes, and quality of life for patients with palliative care needs and their caregivers. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, reported according to PRISMA, with overall evidence quality assessed using GRADE. Data sources: Ovid MEDLINE (all segments), EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus, from inception through September 20, 2024, without restrictions on publication date, sample size, or language. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials that included adult patients with palliative care needs or their caregivers, using any form of decision aids. Outcomes encompassed decision-related, clinical, and quality of life measures. Results: Sixteen randomized controlled trials were included. Participant ages ranged from 44 to 85 years. Predominant decision aids were videos or printed materials addressing goals of care and treatment options, with aims that included improving understanding of prognosis and supporting values clarification. Decision aids significantly improved decision-related knowledge (SMD: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.14–0.67, p = 0.003) and lowered preference for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (OR: 0.28, 95% CI: 0.20–0.40, p < 0.001). They showed no significant impact on decisional conflict, satisfaction, or regret. Conclusion: Evidence regarding the effectiveness of decision aids in palliative care decision making is limited and of low overall quality, with observed improvements primarily in patient knowledge and changes in stated treatment preferences rather than established improvements in decision quality or values-concordant care. Future research should prioritize integration into comprehensive shared decision making frameworks, cultural adaptations, and larger-scale studies to enhance patient-centered outcomes.

Objective The pattern and timing of palliative care utilisation and end-of-life characteristics in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO)-supported patients remain underused. We wanted to share our centre’s experience. Methods This is an institutional review board-approved retrospective study of 45 patients who underwent ECMO at a large ECMO centre in North America between January 2013 and July 2018. Results Only 28.9% of the ECMO patients received in-hospital palliative care consultation at a median of 18 days (IQR 12–31) after hospitalisation and 10.5 days (IQR 1–28) from ECMO initiation. 1-year mortality was high, with 44% dying during hospitalisation and an additional 13% within the following year. Patients experienced prolonged hospitalisations (median hospital length of stay: 39 days, IQR 19–89) and exhibited high rates of tracheostomy (53%) and renal replacement therapy (60%). Most end-of-life cases involved the withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy during ECMO, yet only 53% had a completed living will. Conclusion Our study underscores the need for early initiation of palliative care consultation to enhance symptom management, advance care planning, caregiver support and quality of life for ECMO patients and their families.

The objective of this manuscript is to present the protocol of a study aiming to test the effects of Accelerated Resolution Therapy® (ART) on pre-loss grief and prolonged grief among older adult family caregivers. This study also aims to better understand predictors of response to ART®, and cognitive processes that occur among grieving individuals following ART®. Design: The study is a double-blinded, randomized clinical trial. Setting: This study takes place at both inpatient and outpatient palliative care and hospice programs at two Mayo Clinic sites. Participants: Participants include older adult ( ≥ 60 years) immediate family members who are primary caregivers of someone with an advanced illness and life expectancy of less than 12 months. Intervention: Participants are randomized to either the ART® intervention group or the attention control group. In the ART® intervention, caregivers engage in imaginal exposure, lateral eye movements, and imagery rescripting via 4 sessions lasting 1-1.5 hours each. The attention control group receives a standard social work intervention, including education, resources, and active listening, which is matched for time and attention. Both interventions will longitudinally follow caregivers from active caregiving into bereavement. Outcomes Measured: The primary outcomes of pre-loss grief and prolonged grief will be measured with the Pre-Loss Grief 12 item (PG-12-R) before the care recipient’s death, and with the Prolonged Grief-13 (PG-13-R) afterwards.

Objectives Early in the pandemic, institutional leadership recognised the importance of providing staff with practical, clinically based communication resources. This paper describes the process of cultivating and disseminating rapid communication resources across a multisite institution to assist others who may need to rapidly respond to communication challenges in the future. Methods In April 2020, the Mayo Healthcare Incident Command System charged the Center for Palliative Medicine with developing and disseminating clinical communication resources within several weeks. The Education Chair for the Center for Palliative Medicine created a COVID-19 communication task force composed of clinician-educators with expertise in serious illness communication from all three academic Mayo Clinic sites. The task force elected to focus on providing accessible, just-in-time online content curated from existing resources and adapted to situational needs. Results The task force developed one-page resources with example language on 16 topic areas. Topics included exploring patient values, discussing time-limited trials and making recommendations. The COVID-19 communication website was launched on 28 May, 6 weeks after the institutional request. Conclusions Key takeaway lessons were the need for: (1) alignment with institutional need and priority, (2) rapid team formation with communication education experts across a variety of institutional geographic settings, (3) quick consensus on topic and content delivery to be practically helpful to clinicians, (4) collaboration with outside groups to use and adapt already available resources when possible and (5) early and iterative involvement with information specialists to help facilitate institutional dissemination.

Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) is a progressive and incurable neurodegenerative disease resulting in the loss of motor neurons, eventually leading to death. ALS results in complex physical, emotional, and spiritual care needs. Specialty Palliative Care (SPC) is a medical specialty for patients with serious illness that provides an extra layer of support through complicated symptom management, goals of care conversations, and support to patients and families during hard times. Using MEDLINE, APA Psychinfo, and Dynamed databases, we reviewed the literature of SPC in ALS to inform and support an expert opinion perspective on this topic. This manuscript focuses on several key areas of SPC for ALS including insurance and care models, advance care planning, symptom management, quality of life, caregiver support, and end-of-life care. Recommendations to improve specialty palliative care for patients with ALS are reviewed in the discussion section.

e24082 Background: Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) is associated with significant short- and long-term sequelae that affect patients’ overall quality of life (QoL) and their physical and psychological well-being. Studies have shown improvement in patient QoL and physician satisfaction with palliative care involvement in the allo-HCT process. However, patient and physician perceptions regarding palliative care often impact timely referral. We conducted a prospective study to examine patient perceptions of palliative care both before and after palliative care consultation during evaluation for allo-HCT. Methods: This is a prospective, single-center study, of patients > 18 years of age, who were referred for a palliative care consultation as part of standard evaluation for allo-HCT. Patients were administered a pre- and post-visit internally derived questionnaire to assess their understanding and comfort level with palliative care. The primary objective of this study was to examine patient perceptions of palliative care consultation during evaluation for allo-HCT. Primary end point was the change in patient pre- and post- questionnaire responses. Secondary endpoint was the completion of advance care planning documentation pre- and post- consultation. Results: We enrolled 32 patients (male = 14) undergoing evaluation for allo-HCT with a primary diagnosis of AML (n = 8), NHL (n = 8), MDS (n = 7), ALL (n = 2), and other (n = 7). Following consultation with palliative care there was a statistically significant increase in patient understanding of the reason for the appointment, p = 0.0006. There was also a significant increase in patient’s knowledge of palliative care, with only 28% describing their knowledge as “good” or “excellent” prior to consultation and 79.3% after consultation, p < 0.0001. There was an observed positive, non-statistically significant, trend in patient comfort level with palliative medicine with only 20.7% (n = 6) describing their comfort as “high” or “very high” prior to consultation and 51.7% (n = 15) after consultation, p = 0.60. There was a higher rate of completion of advance care planning documentation following consultation with palliative medicine 56.3% vs 71.4%, p = 0.042. Conclusions: Palliative care consultation prior to allo-HCT increases a patient’s understanding of the role of palliative medicine as part of their allo-HCT and improves advance care planning. These findings need to be validated in a larger, multicenter, patient cohort.

230 Background: Inpatient mortality review is commonly used to improve patient care. Individual review of outpatient deaths is less common, yet 30-day mortality after hospital stay is an important quality metric. In this study, we sought to identify opportunities for care improvement by reviewing outpatient mortalities for cancer patients who died within 30 days of hospitalization. Methods: We identified 48 patients at Mayo Clinic Florida, with a hematologic (heme) or solid tumor (onc) cancer, who died within 30 days of an index hospital stay in 2018. We created a 32-question review survey to address quality of care around the hospital stay. The review team consisted of 1) heme or onc attendings, 2) heme/onc fellows, and 3) palliative care attendings. Each case was reviewed by one member of each of the 3 groups, split into heme or onc cases. Discrepancies in objective data points were resolved by the research team. Results: Of 143 surveys sent to 13 physicians (3 heme), 112 responses from 11 physicians (1 heme) for 47 patients were received. Twenty-one patients (45%) received cancer therapy within 30 days of death, and 23 (49%) were admitted >2 times in 2 months prior to death. For onc cases, attendings rated prognosis as discussed 83% of the time, vs 65% of fellows and 39% of palliative care; in heme cases, the attending rated prognosis as discussed 11% of the time, vs 86% of fellows and 50% of palliative care. In heme cases, the attending rated expected survival <3 months in 33% of cases vs 71% by fellows and 89% by palliative care; in onc cases, the reviews were more consistent (79% attending, 85% fellow, 93% palliative care). See Table for timing of prognosis discussions and palliative care involvement. Conclusions: The most common improvement opportunities identified by reviewing heme/onc patients who died within 30 days of a hospital stay included documented prognosis discussion and involvement of palliative care. Opportunities differed between heme and onc patients. Future directions include identifying and mitigating barriers that providers face in reaching these goals for their patients. [Table: see text]