Background: Incorporating patient narratives into the electronic health record (EHR) is an opportunity to integrate patients' values and beliefs into their care and improve patient–clinician communication.
Objective: The study's aims were to (1) identify barriers and facilitators influencing the implementation of a cocreated patient narrative intervention and (2) assess the acceptability/usability of the patient's narrative from the perspective of key stakeholders—the patient and acute care bedside nurse.
Design: We used an implementation design using mixed methods.
Setting/Subjects: Twenty patients and 18 nurses were enrolled from five units in an acute care hospital.
Results: For patients, the narrative intervention provided an avenue to discuss and share how illness has impacted their life in psychological, social, and spiritual belief domains. For nurses, the ability to read the patient's narrative provided benefits that fostered improved communication and more connection with their patients. Despite successfully meeting recruitment targets, time was the largest barrier for patient and nurse participants. Overall, the nurse participants gave high ratings on most of the items on the System Usability Scale with one exception—EHR integration. The lack of EHR integration on the System Usability Survey corresponds with the nurses' stated desire for a prominent location of patient narratives in the EHR.
Conclusions: The patient narrative intervention was acceptable and usable for hospitalized patients and nurse participants. Our study demonstrates that a cocreated patient narrative intervention provides avenues for patients and nurses to connect despite being in hectic acute care settings.
BACKGROUND: Doctors, particularly general practitioners, play a significant role in assisting patients to create advance care plans. When medically indicated, these documents are important tools to promote congruence between end-of-life care and patient's personal preferences. Despite this, little is known regarding the availability of these documents in hospitals. The aim of this study was to identify the proportion of people who died in hospital without an advance care plan and how many of these had advance care planning (ACP) documents in their general practice records.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of patient hospital records with manual linkage to general practice records. The large regional hospital in Victoria, Australia has a catchment population in excess of 300,000 people. The study sample was patients aged 75 years and over who died in the hospital between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2017. The hospital records of these patients were examined to identify those which did not have a system alert for ACP documents on the file. Alerted ACP documents were limited to those legislated in the state of Victoria: advance care plan, Enduring Power of Attorney (Medical Treatment) or Enduring Power of Guardianship. Where no ACP document system alert was found in the hospital record, the patient's nominated general practice was consented to participate and the corresponding general practice record was examined. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics.
RESULTS: Of the 406 patients who died in hospital, 76.1% (309) did not have a system alert for any ACP document. Of the 309 hospital records without a system alert, 144 (46.7%) corresponding general practice records were examined. Of these, 14.6% included at least one ACP document, including four advance care plans, that were not available in hospital.
CONCLUSIONS: Unless ACP documents are consistently communicated from general practice, patient's preferences may be unknown during end-of-life care. It is important that both doctors and patients are supported to use connected electronic health records to ensure that documents are readily available to healthcare staff when they are required.
Context/Objective: Essential indicators of high-quality end-of-life care in intensive care units (ICUs) have been established but examined inconsistently and predominantly with small samples, mostly from Western countries. Our study goal was to comprehensively measure end-of-life-care quality delivered in ICUs using chart-derived process-based quality measures for a large cohort of critically ill Taiwanese patients.
Methods: For this observational study, patients with APACHE II score =20 or goal of palliative care and with ICU stay exceeding three days ( N = 326) were consecutively recruited and followed until death.
Results: Documentation of process-based indicators for Taiwanese patients dying in ICUs was variable (8.9%–96.3%), but high for physician communication of the patient's poor prognosis to his/her family members (93.0%), providing specialty palliative-care consultations (73.3%), a do-not-resuscitate order in place at death (96.3%), death without cardiopulmonary resuscitation (93.5%), and family presence at patient death (76.1%). Documentation was infrequent for social-worker involvement (8.9%) and interdisciplinary family meetings to discuss goals of care (22.4%). Patients predominantly (79.8%) continued life-sustaining treatments (LSTs) until death and died with full life support, with 88.3% and 58.9% of patients dying with mechanical ventilation support and vasopressors, respectively.
Conclusions: Taiwanese patients dying in ICUs heavily used LSTs until death despite high prevalences of documented prognostic communication, providing specialty palliative-care consultations, having a do-not-resuscitate order in place, and death without cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Family meetings should be actively promoted to facilitate appropriate end-of-life-care decisions to avoid unnecessary suffering from potentially inappropriate LSTs during the last days of life.
Background: Through the British Columbia, Prospective Outcomes and Support Initiative (POSI), registered nurses collect patient-reported outcome (PRO) data during telephone follow-up with palliative oncology patients.
Objective : The research objective was to describe the usefulness and influence of the nursing care provided through POSI follow-up on palliative patients and health services.
Methods : We used a qualitative interpretive description approach involving the collection and analysis of semistructured interview data with 20 palliative patients and 12 oncology nurses. All participant data were subjected to an inductively derived coding framework. Analytic categories were identified and iteratively revised through constant comparative techniques to develop representative themes.
Results : The accounts of patients and nurses suggest that telephone follow-up with PROs enabled the nurses to (1) focus on the priorities of patients experiencing complex health challenges, (2) manage complex symptoms, (3) ease the patient’s transition home, and (4) improve access to and use of health services. Suggestions for improving POSI nurse follow-up centered on flexibility in the timing of the follow-up, creating dedicated POSI work assignments, and having additional time to personalize assessments and nursing care beyond the PRO questionnaires.
Conclusions : Nursing care employing PROs via telephone follow-up can improve palliative cancer patients’ quality of life and health service use.
Background: When patients receiving palliative care are transferred between care settings, adequate collaboration and information exchange between health care professionals is necessary to ensure continuity, efficiency and safety of care. Several studies identified deficits in communication and information exchange between care settings. Aim of this study was to get insight in the quality of collaboration and information exchange in palliative care from the perspectives of nurses.
Methods: We performed a cross-sectional regional survey study among nurses working in different care settings. Nurses were approached via professional networks and media. Respondents were asked questions about collaboration in palliative care in general and about their last deceased patient. Potential associations between quality scores for collaboration and information handovers and characteristics of respondents or patients were tested with Pearson’s chi-square test.
Results: A total of 933 nurses filled in the questionnaire. Nurses working in nursing homes were least positive about inter-organizational collaboration. Forty-six per cent of all nurses had actively searched for such collaboration in the last year. For their last deceased patient, 10% of all nurses had not received the information handover in time, 33% missed information they needed. An adequate information handover was positively associated with timeliness and completeness of the information and the patient being well-informed, not with procedural characteristics.
Conclusion: Nurses report that collaboration between care settings and information exchange in palliative care is suboptimal. This study suggests that health care organizations should give more attention to shared professionalization towards inter-organizational collaboration among nurses in order to facilitate high-quality palliative care.
Background: To improve the quality of advance care planning (ACP) in primary care, it is important to understand the frequency of and topics involved in the ACP discussion between patients and their family physicians (FPs).
Methods: A secondary analysis of a previous multicenter cross-sectional observational study was performed. The primary outcome of this analysis was the frequency of and topics involved in the ACP discussion between outpatients and FPs. In March 2017, 22 family physicians at 17 clinics scheduled a day to assess outpatients and enrolled patients older than 65 years who were recognized by FPs as having regular visits. We defined three ACP discussion topics: 1) future decline in activities of daily living (ADL), 2) future inability to eat, and 3) surrogate decision makers. FPs assessed whether they had ever discussed any ACP topics with each patient and their family members, and if they had documented the results of these discussions in medical records before patients were enrolled in the present study. We defined patients as being at risk of deteriorating and dying if they had at least 2 positive general indicators or at least 1 positive disease-specific indicator in the Japanese version of the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool.
Results: In total, 382 patients with a mean age of 77.4 ± 7.9 years were enrolled, and 63.1% were female. Seventy-nine patients (20.7%) had discussed at least one ACP topic with their FPs. However, only 23 patients (6.0%) had discussed an ACP topic with family members and their FPs, with the results being documented in their medical records. The topic of future ADL decline was discussed and documented more often than the other two topics. Patients at risk of deteriorating and dying discussed ACP topics significantly more often than those not at risk of deteriorating and dying (39.4% vs. 16.8%, p < 0.001).
Conclusion: FPs may discuss ACP with some of their patients, but may not often document the results of this discussion in medical records. FPs need to be encouraged to discuss ACP with patients and family members and describe the decisions reached in medical records.
BACKGROUND: Hospices provide multidimensional care. In the Netherlands, patients with <3 months estimated life expectancy have access to hospice care. Insight into patients admitted to hospices and the care provided is lacking. In preparation for a national multicenter study, a pilot study was performed.
OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to test the appropriateness of the study procedures and the availability of hospice patient records (HPRs), and patient and care characteristics.
METHOD: A cross-sectional pilot study was performed using a descriptive exploratory design. Sixteen hospices were invited to participate, and HPRs from 8 deceased patients per hospice were selected. Data were collected using self-developed electronic case report forms.
OUTCOMES: (1). Appropriateness of procedures: availability of HPRs and identified barriers and strategies. (2) Availability of patient and care characteristics in HPRs.
RESULTS: In total, 104 HPRs of patients from 13 hospices were enrolled. Various types of HPRs were found with different availabilities: nurses' records were most available (98%) compared to volunteers' records (62%). Overarching barriers were as follows: ethical issues, lack of knowledge, and lack of communication. Information about the illness was most available (97%), whereas descriptions of experienced symptoms were least available (10%).
CONCLUSION: Collecting HPRs is difficult and time-consuming. Specifically, data from separate records of home care nurses and general practitioners were difficult to come by. Patient and care characteristics were alternately present, which led to an extension of data collection in HPRs to 3 time periods. Piloting is essential to adjust study procedures and outcome measures to ensure a feasible national multicenter hospice study.
A retrospective audit of terminology utilized in discharge summaries to convey the death of inpatients in an Australian tertiary hospital was undertaken. Completion rates of summaries for this patient cohort were also assessed. Less than 60% had a summary finalized, and for those that did, euphemisms were utilized most commonly; passed away was employed in >70% of cases. There is no difference in terminology choice between doctors at the beginning, compared to the end, of their first year as a doctor, nor between first year or more experienced doctors. Irrespective of clinician level, doctors use euphemisms to convey a death.
Few studies have investigated palliative and end-of-life care processes among young adults (YAs), aged 18-34 years, who died of cancer. This retrospective study used a natural language processing algorithm to identify documentation and timing of four process measures in YA cancer decedents' medical records: palliative care involvement, discussions of goals of care, code status, and hospice. Among 2878 YAs, 138 had a recorded date of death. In this group, 54.3% had at least one process measure documented early (31-180 days before death), 18.0% had only late documentation of process measures (0-30 days), and 27.5% had none documented.
Background: Advance care planning (ACP) is a process in which professionals, patients and their relatives discuss wishes and options for future care. ACP in the palliative phase reduces the chance that decisions have to be taken suddenly and can therefore improve the quality of life and death. The primary aim of this study is to explore how ACP takes place in cases of people with intellectual disabilities (ID).
Method: Medical files were analysed, and interviews were held in six care organisations for people with mild to severe ID. The data concerned people with ID (n = 30), 15 in the palliative phase, identified using the 'surprise question', and 15 who had died after an identifiable period of illness. Additional pre-structured telephone interviews were conducted with their relatives (n = 30) and professionals (n = 33).
Results: For half of the people with ID who had died, the first report in their file about palliative care (needs) was less than 1 month before their death. Professionals stated that ACP was started in response to the person's deteriorating health situation. A do-not-attempt-resuscitation order was recorded for nearly all people with ID (93%). A smaller group also had other agreements between professionals and relatives documented in their files, mainly about potentially life-sustaining treatments (43%) and/or hospitalisation admissions (47%). Relatives and professionals are satisfied with the mutual cooperation in ACP in the palliative phase. Cognitive and communication disabilities were most frequently mentioned by relatives and professionals as reasons for not involving people with ID in ACP.
Conclusions: Advance care planning in the palliative phase of people with ID focuses mainly on medical issues at the end of life. Specific challenges concern a proactive identification of changing needs, fear to initiate ACP discussions, documentation of ACP in medical files and the involvement of people with ID in ACP. It is recommended that relatives and professionals should be informed about the content of ACP and professionals should be trained in communicating in advance about wishes for future care.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine the impact of advanced care planning (ACP) on potentially avoidable hospital admissions at the end of life (EOL) among a sample of hospice-referred patients with cancer, in order to present actionable considerations for the practicing clinician.
METHODS: This study was designed as a retrospective cohort using electronic health record data that assessed likelihood of hospital admissions in the last 30 days of life for 1185 patients with a primary diagnosis of cancer, referred to hospice between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2015, at a large academic medical center. Inverse probability treatment weighting based on calculated propensity scores balanced measured covariates between those with and without ACP at baseline. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated from estimated potential outcome means for the impact of ACP on admissions in the last 30 days of life.
RESULTS: A verified do-not-resuscitate (DNR) order prior to the last 30 days of life was associated with reduced odds of admission compared to those without a DNR (OR = 0.30; P < .001). An ACP note in the problem list prior to the last 30 days of life was associated with reduced odds of admission compared to those without an ACP note (OR = 0.71, P = .042), and further reduced odds if done 6 months prior to death (OR = 0.35, P < .001).
CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that dedicated ACP documentation is associated with fewer admissions in the last 30 days of life for patients with advanced cancer referred to hospice. Improving ACP processes prior to hospice referral holds promise for reducing EOL admissions.
BACKGROUND: Little research has explored the detail of practice when using sedative medications at the end of life. One work package of the I-CAN-CARE research programme investigates this in UK palliative care.
AIMS: To investigate current practices when using sedative medication at the end of life in London, UK, by (1) qualitatively exploring the understandings of palliative care clinicians, (2) examining documented sedative use in patient records and (3) comparing findings from both investigations.
DESIGN: We conducted focus groups with experienced palliative care physicians and nurses, and simultaneously reviewed deceased patient records.
SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: In total, 10 physicians and 17 senior nurses in London hospice or hospital/community palliative care took part in eight focus groups. Simultaneously, 50 patient records for people who received continuous sedation at end of life in the hospice and hospital were retrieved and reviewed.
RESULTS: Focus group participants all said that they used sedative medication chiefly for managing agitation or distress; selecting drugs and dosages as appropriate for patients’ individual needs; and aiming to use the lowest possible dosages for patients to be ‘comfortable’, ‘calm’ or ‘relaxed’. None used structured observational tools to assess sedative effects, strongly preferring clinical observation and judgement. The patient records’ review corroborated these qualitative findings, with the median continuous dose of midazolam administered being 10 mg/24 h (range: 0.4–69.5 mg/24 h).
CONCLUSION: Clinical practice in these London settings broadly aligns with the European Association for Palliative Care framework for using sedation at the end of life, but lacks any objective monitoring of depth of sedation. Our follow-on study explores the utility and feasibility of objectively monitoring sedation in practice.
BACKGROUND: Patient held records need to be evaluated in palliative care settings.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate how patients, families and professionals in a specialist palliative setting use a patient held record created through close consultation with patients and carers.
METHODS: A mixed methods prospective longitudinal cohort study in the UK-adult patients under community specialist palliative care nurse review or attending day hospice were given questionnaires at record introduction and after 4-6 weeks. Hospice staff completed a questionnaire and focus group after 8 months.
RESULTS: From Sept 2016 to June 2017, 550 patients were screened, 347 (63.1%) were offered records and 259 accepted (74.6%). 238 accepted a research pack, 105 returned questionnaire 1 (44.1% response rate) and 26 returned questionnaire 2 (24.8% of initial respondents). Questionnaire 1 (patients): 40% found it burdensome repeating information, and almost 70% were interested in a record to reduce this. Questionnaire 2 (patients): 74% found the record easy to use, but few (4, 15.4%) used it regularly. Over 60% stated the record was useful and would recommend it to others, despite not using it themselves. Professionals indicated that it was mainly patients and relatives who used the record, not non-palliative professionals.
CONCLUSIONS: While initial uptake of the record was high, use appeared low. While people saw real value in the record for others, they did not generally use it themselves. This evaluation demonstrates that patient held records are unlikely to be used by palliative care patients even though they see value in the concept.
We used a standardized terminology to describe patient problems and the nursing care provided in a pilot study of a transitional palliative care intervention with patients and caregivers. Narrative phrases of a nurse's documentation were mapped to the Omaha System (problem, intervention, and target). Over the course of the intervention, 109 notes (1473 phrases) were documented for 9 adults discharged home (mean age, 68 years; mean number of morbid conditions, 7.1; mean number of medications, 15.4). Thirty-one of the 42 Omaha System problems were identified; the average number of problems per patient was 13. Phrases were mapped to all 4 problem domains (environmental, 2.6%; health-related behaviors, 52.3%; physiological, 30.8%; and psychosocial, 14.3%). Surveillance phrases were the most frequent (72.4%); case management phrases were at 20.9%, and teaching, guidance, and counseling phrases were at 6.7%. The number of problems documented per patient correlated with the time between the first and last notes ( = 0.76; P = .02) but not with the number of notes per patient ( = 0.51; P = .16). These results are the first to describe nursing interventions in transitioning palliative care from hospital to home with a standardized terminology. Linking interventions to patient problems is critical for describing effective strategies in transitioning palliative care from hospital to home.
Background:Optimal care for patients in the palliative care setting requires effective clinical teamwork. Communication may be challenging for health-care workers from different disciplines. Daily rounds are one way for clinical teams to share information and develop care plans for patients.
Objective:The objective of this initiative was to improve the structure and process of daily palliative care rounds by incorporating the use of standardized tools and improved documentation into the meeting. We chose a quality improvement (QI) approach to address this initiative. Our aims were to increase the use of assessment tools when discussing patient care in rounds and to improve the documentation and accessibility of important information in the health record, including goals of care.
Methods:This QI initiative used a preintervention and postintervention comparison of the outcome measures of interest. The initiative was tested in a palliative care unit (PCU) over a 22-month period from April 2014 to January 2016. Participants were clinical staff in the PCU.
Results:Data collected after the completion of several plan-do-study-act cycles showed increased use and incorporation of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System and Palliative Performance Scale into patient care discussions as well as improvement in inclusion of goals of care into the patient plan of care.
Conclusion:Our findings demonstrate that the effectiveness of daily palliative care rounds can be improved by incorporating the use of standard assessment tools and changes into the meeting structure to better focus and direct patient care discussions.
Noel Conway recently lost his appeal at the High Court calling for a judicial review into the blanket ban on assisted dying and stated his intention to seek permission to appeal to the Supreme Court. Regardless of outcome, uncertainty remains surrounding the practice of access to medical records when a patient seeks an assisted death abroad.1
The numbers of British citizens dying in Switzerland is increasing year on year. Last year 47 British citizens died at Dignitas alone and their UK-based membership rose to 1139 people.2 However, Dignitas is only one of three Swiss organisations that accept British citizens and so the true incidence remains unknown.
BACKGROUND: Factors leading to inappropriate critical care, that is treatment that should not be provided because it does not offer the patient meaningful benefit, have not been rigorously characterized.
OBJECTIVE: We explored medical record documentation about patients who received inappropriate critical care and those who received appropriate critical care to examine factors associated with the provision of inappropriate treatment.
DESIGN: Medical records were abstracted from 123 patients who were assessed as receiving inappropriate treatment and 66 patients who were assessed as receiving appropriate treatment but died within six months of intensive care unit (ICU) admission. We used mixed methods combining qualitative analysis of medical record documentation with multivariable analysis to examine the relationship between patient and communication factors and the receipt of inappropriate treatment, and present these within a conceptual model.
SETTING: One academic health system.
RESULTS: Medical records revealed 21 themes pertaining to prognosis and factors influencing treatment aggressiveness. Four themes were independently associated with patients receiving inappropriate treatment according to physicians. When decision making was not guided by physicians (odds ratio [OR] 3.76, confidence interval [95% CI] 1.21-11.70) or was delayed by patient/family (OR 4.52, 95% CI 1.69-12.04), patients were more likely to receive inappropriate treatment. Documented communication about goals of care (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.10-0.84) and patient's preferences driving decision making (OR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00-0.27) were associated with lower odds of receiving inappropriate treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Medical record documentation suggests that inappropriate treatment occurs in the setting of communication and decision-making patterns that may be amenable to intervention.
BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) is recommended for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Yet, ACP documentation is often inaccessible at the time of impending respiratory failure, which may lead to unwanted and costly medical intensive care unit admissions. Electronic medical records (EMRs) contain directive fields and the ability to search for keywords and phrases, but these strategies to rapidly identify ACP have not been validated.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to identify the percentage of patients with severe COPD exacerbation who have outpatient ACP documentation and validate two EMR-based methods of rapidly identifying ACP documentation.
DESIGN: Retrospective cohort analysis.
SETTING/SUBJECTS: Patients who required medical intensive care unit admission for exacerbation of COPD at an urban safety-net hospital between 2009 and 2014 were observed.
MEASUREMENTS: We analyzed the sensitivity and specificity of two methods to rapidly identify outpatient ACP documentation: (1) documentation in the EMR directive field and (2) text string search of notes for key phrases, compared with a gold standard clinician review.
RESULTS: Our cohort (n = 311) was racially diverse and severely ill with obstructive lung disease. One hundred thirty-two patients (43%) had ACP documentation by gold standard chart review. Compared with a gold standard chart review, a parsimonious text string search was both sensitive (95%) and specific (97%), while the directive box was specific (100%), but not sensitive (54%), for identifying outpatient ACP documentation.
CONCLUSIONS: EMR directive fields may substantially underestimate ACP when used alone. As full clinician chart reviews are impractical in the emergent setting, text string searches may be a useful strategy to rapidly identify ACP discussions for clinical care and research.
Over the span of their career, physicians experience changes to their professional role and professional identity. The process of continual adaptation in their work setting incurs losses. These losses can be ambiguous, cumulative, and may require grieving. Grief in the workplace is unsanctioned, and may contribute to physicians' experience of burnout (emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, low sense of achievement). Acknowledging loss, validating grief, and being prescient in dealing with physician burnout is essential.