Journal of palliative medicine
-
Background: Self-rated health (SRH) and the surprise question (SQ) capture perceptions of health and are independent risk factors for poor outcomes. Little is known about their association with physiologic and functional decline. Objective: Determine the association of SRH and SQ with frailty and functional status in older adults with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and their utility as screening tools. Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting/Subjects: Two hundred seventy-two adults, age ≥60 years, with advanced CKD seen in nephrology clinic. Measurements: Patients completed SRH and were evaluated for frailty (Fried criteria and Clinical Frailty Scale [CFS]) and functional status (Katz and Lawton indices of activities of daily living [ADLs] and instrumental ADLs [iADLs]). Providers completed the SQ. ⋯ A SRH of excellent, very good, or good was predictive of nonfrail status (Fried negative predictive value [NPV]: 0.92; CFS NPV: 0.92) and preserved ADL function (NPV for ≥1 deficit: 0.96). A SQ response of 5, 4, or 3 (i.e., surprised) was predictive of nonfrail status and preserved ADL function (CFS NPV: 0.90; ADL ≥1 deficit NPV: 0.95). A SQ response of 1 or 2 had a positive predictive value of 0.64 for ≥1 iADL deficit. Conclusions: Subjective health measures may be useful screening tools for frailty and functional status.
-
Palliative principles are increasingly within the scope of emergency medicine (EM). In EM, there remain untapped opportunities to improve primary palliative care (PC) and integrate patients earlier into the palliative continuum. ⋯ To build effective, efficient, and sustainable partnerships, palliative clinicians are best served by understanding the ED's practice priorities. The authors, each EM and Hospice and Palliative Medicine board certified and in active practice, present these 10 high-yield tips to optimize the ED consultation by PC teams.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Feasibility of Implementing a Palliative Care Intervention for People with Heart Failure: Learnings from a Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial.
Background: People with heart failure (HF) have high morbidity and mortality and may benefit from palliative care (PC). Objective: To pilot a randomized, clinical trial of a PC intervention for people with HF. Design: Participants were randomized to usual care (UC) or intervention (UC plus specialty PC) between January 2012 and December 2013. The initial PC consultation was conducted in-hospital, with six additional contacts from the PC team over six months. Setting/Subjects: The study was undertaken in a large, urban, academic medical center with patients (n = 30) with New York Heart Association HF Class II-IV. Measurements: Patients completed a survey at baseline, three and six months, assessing pain, dyspnea, depression, and quality of life (QoL). Results: Although there were significant improvements in mean scores from baseline to six months for pain (4.3 vs. 2.4, p = 0.05), dyspnea (3.9 vs. 2.2, p = 0.03), and QoL (59.2 vs. 42.7, p = 0.001), there were no differences between study groups over time. ⋯ Given the trajectory of HF, studies may need to recruit outpatients and follow patients for a longer period to fully evaluate the impact of PC interventions. Clinical trials Identifier: NCT01461681.
-
In 2008, a Canadian strategy called the "Educating Future Physicians in Palliative and End-of-Life Care" (EFPPEC) project published national medical undergraduate competencies for palliative and end-of-life care. Since that time, there have been several changes in the practice environment. ⋯ The EFPPEC update document in English was finalized in June 2018, and subsequent minor amendments to the French version were completed in January 2019. This report describes the process and also shares the new updated EFPPEC competencies with the wider palliative care community.
-
Background: Cancer-related physical symptoms can decrease patients' overall quality of life and are often underdiagnosed. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) is widely used in palliative care for cancer patients to easily assess cancer patients' symptoms. It has been often modified, adding symptoms and explanations, and translated into many languages. ⋯ They highlighted some concerns more about the tool itself than the translation: the time line "now," the difficulty to quantify a symptom in a numerical evaluation. Some items (sleep and appetite) needed to be reread and for some others (digestive and psychological symptoms, and well-being) to be reordered in the questionnaire. Conclusion: The ESAS12-F is well accepted and easy to use for the cancer patients. The next step is to carry out a psychometric validation of the definitive version of the ESAS12-F.