scholarly journals Unwelcome memento mori or best clinical practice? Community end of life anticipatory medication prescribing practice: A mixed methods observational study

2021 ◽  
pp. 026921632110433
Author(s):  
Ben Bowers ◽  
Kristian Pollock ◽  
Stephen Barclay
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
General Practitioner ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Community Nursing ◽  
Memento Mori ◽  
Life Planning ◽  
End Of Life Planning ◽  
Prescribing Practice ◽  
Clinical Records

Background: Anticipatory medications are injectable drugs prescribed ahead of possible need for administration if distressing symptoms arise in the final days of life. Little is known about how they are prescribed in primary care. Aim: To investigate the frequency, timing and recorded circumstances of anticipatory medications prescribing for patients living at home and in residential care. Design: Retrospective mixed methods observational study using General Practitioner and community nursing clinical records. Setting/participants: 329 deceased adult patients registered with Eleven General Practitioner practices and two associated community nursing services in two English counties (30 most recent deaths per practice). Patients died from any cause except trauma, sudden death or suicide, between 4 March 2017 and 25 September 2019. Results: Anticipatory medications were prescribed for 167/329 (50.8%) of the deceased patients, between 0 and 1212 days before death (median 17 days). The likelihood of prescribing was significantly higher for patients with a recorded preferred place of death (odds ratio [OR] 34; 95% CI 15–77; p < 0.001) and specialist palliative care involvement (OR 7; 95% CI 3–19; p < 0.001). For 66.5% of patients (111/167) anticipatory medications were recorded as being prescribed as part of a single end-of-life planning intervention. Conclusion: The variability in the timing of prescriptions highlights the challenges in diagnosing the end-of-life phase and the potential risks of prescribing far in advance of possible need. Patient and family views and experiences of anticipatory medication care, and their preferences for involvement in prescribing decision-making, warrant urgent investigation.

scholarly journals Unwelcome memento mori or best clinical practice? Community end-of-life anticipatory medication prescribing practice: a mixed methods observational study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Bowers ◽  
Kristian Pollock ◽  
Stephen Barclay
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
General Practitioner ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Community Nursing ◽  
Memento Mori ◽  
Life Planning ◽  
End Of Life Planning ◽  
Prescribing Practice ◽  
Clinical Records

Background: Anticipatory medications are injectable drugs prescribed ahead of possible need for administration if distressing symptoms arise in the final days of life. Little is known about how they are prescribed in primary care. Aim: To investigate the frequency, timing and recorded circumstances of anticipatory medications prescribing for patients living at home and in residential care. Design: Retrospective mixed methods observational study using General Practitioner and community nursing clinical records. Setting/participants: 329 deceased adult patients registered with Eleven General Practitioner practices and two associated community nursing services in Hertfordshire and Cambridgeshire, England (30 most recent deaths per practice). Patients died from any cause except trauma, sudden death or suicide, between 4 March 2017 and 25 September 2019. Results: Anticipatory medications were prescribed for 167/329 (50.8%) of the deceased patients, between 0 and 1212 days before death (median 17 days). The likelihood of prescribing was significantly higher for patients with a recorded preferred place of death (odds ratio [OR] 34; 95% CI 15-77; p < 0.001) and specialist palliative care involvement (OR 7; 95% CI 3-19; p < 0.001). For 66.5% of patients (111/167) anticipatory medications were recorded as being prescribed as part of a single end of-life planning intervention. Conclusion: The variability in the timing of prescriptions highlights the challenges in diagnosing the end-of-life phase and the potential risks of prescribing far in advance of possible need. Patient and family preferences for involvement in anticipatory medications prescribing decision-making and their experiences of care warrant urgent investigation.

Planning for End of Life

2021 ◽  
pp. 104990912110141
Author(s):  
Natasha Ansari ◽  
Eric Johnson ◽  
Jennifer A. Sinnott ◽  
Sikandar Ansari
Keyword(s):  
End Of Life ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
P Value ◽  
Life Planning ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
End Of Life Planning ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Alternative Medications ◽  
Patient’S Perception

Background: Oncology provider discussions of treatment options, outcomes of treatment, and end of life planning are essential to care for patients with advanced malignancies. Studies have shown that despite this, many patients do not have adequate care planning, including end of life planning. It is thought that the accessibility of information outside of clinical encounters and individual factors and/or beliefs may influence the patient’s perception of disease. Aims: The objective of this study was to evaluate if patient understanding of treatment goals matched the provider and if there were areas of discrepancy. If a discrepancy was found, the survey inquired further into more specific aspects. Methods: A questionnaire-based survey was performed at a cancer hospital outpatient clinic. 100 consecutive and consenting patients who had stage IV non-curable lung, gastrointestinal (GI), or other cancer were included in the study. Patients must have had at least 2 visits with their oncologist. Results: 40 patients reported their disease might be curable and 60 reported their disease was not curable. Patients who reported their disease was not curable were more likely to be 65 years or older (P-value: 0.055). They were more likely to report that their doctor discussed the possibility of their cancer getting worse (78.3% VS 55%; P-value 0.024), that their doctor discussed end of life plans (58.3% VS 30%; P- value: 0.01), and that they had appointed a health care decision-maker (86.7% VS 62.5%; P-value: 0.01). 65% of patients who thought their disease might be curable reported that their doctor said it might be curable, compared with only 6.7% of patients who thought their disease was not curable (p < 0.001). Or, equivalently, 35% of patients who thought their disease might be curable reported that their doctor’s opinion was that it was not curable, compared with 93% of patients who thought their disease was not curable (p < 0.001). Patients who had lung cancer were more likely to believe their cancer was not curable than patients with gastrointestinal or other cancer, though the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.165). Patients who said their disease might be curable selected as possible reasons that a miracle (50%) or alternative medicine (66.7%) would get rid of the cancer, or said their family wanted them to believe the cancer would go away (16.7%) or that another doctor said it would (4.2%). Patients who said their disease might be curable said they did so due to alternative medications, another doctor, or their family. Restricting to the 70 patients who reported their doctors telling them their disease was not curable, 20% of them still said that they personally felt their disease might be curable. Patients below 65 years of age were more likely to disagree with the doctor in this case (P-value: 0.047). Conclusion: This survey of patients diagnosed with stage IV cancer shows that a significant number of patients had misunderstandings of the treatment and curability of their disease. Findings suggest that a notable proportion kept these beliefs even after being told by treating physicians that their disease is not curable.

Social Work Involvement in End of Life Planning

2006 ◽  
Vol 47 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 47-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janna C. Heyman ◽  
Irene A. Gutheil
Keyword(s):  
Social Work ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Life Planning ◽  
Work Involvement ◽  
End Of Life Planning

Talk About Death: End of Life Planning with a Virtual Agent

2017 ◽  
pp. 441-450 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dina Utami ◽  
Timothy Bickmore ◽  
Asimina Nikolopoulou ◽  
Michael Paasche-Orlow
Keyword(s):  
End Of Life ◽  
Virtual Agent ◽  
Life Planning ◽  
End Of Life Planning

Serious illness conversation and end of life care utilization at an academic medical center.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 29-29
Author(s):  
William P. Tompkins ◽  
Christine Agnes Ciunci ◽  
Suzanne Walker ◽  
Kelly Patton ◽  
Amy Schwartz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Time Interval ◽  
Inpatient Setting ◽  
Serious Illness ◽  
Life Planning ◽  
End Of Life Planning

29 Background: Hospice has been associated with improved quality of life for patients, cost savings, and reduction in caregiver-grief-related depression. While cancer patients make up a plurality of hospice utilizers nationally, many patients are only on hospice for a limited period (in Medicare patients, a median of 18 days). Studies suggest engaging cancer patients to discuss goals and priorities using the Serious Illness Conversation (SIC) Guide has a positive impact on prognostic understanding and end-of-life planning. More frequent utilization of SICs may prompt earlier enrollment of oncology patients in hospice when appropriate. Methods: We identified cancer patients enrolled in hospice at the Abramson Cancer Center at Penn Presbyterian Medical Center from 2019-2020 after all providers received SIC training. Patient demographics, cancer diagnosis, type of hospice (home versus inpatient), SIC usage, palliative care referral patterns and time on hospice were abstracted. Results: 104 patients were enrolled in hospice during the study period. The majority of patients were female (51%). 45% were Caucasian, and 31% were African American. The most common cancer diagnoses were thoracic (52%) and gastrointestinal (32%) malignancies. 85 patients (82%) were enrolled on home hospice and 19 patients (18%) inpatient hospice. Palliative care usage included 50 inpatient and 24 outpatient consultations; 30 patients (29%) in the cohort never utilized palliative care. 52 (50%) of patients did not have a SIC. 47% (40 patients) enrolled in home hospice had an SIC while 63% (12 patients) on inpatient hospice had an SIC. The median time interval between a patient’s SIC conversation and hospice enrollment was longer in home hospice patients (74 days) compared to inpatient hospice (33 days). Patients on home hospice spent an average of 44 days on hospice versus 2 days in the inpatient setting. Conclusions: Half of the patients at Penn Presbyterian Medical Center enrolled in hospice during the study period did not have an SIC, and 29% did not see palliative care prior to starting hospice. The median time from SIC initiation to hospice enrollment was significantly longer for patients on home hospice compared to inpatient hospice suggesting a need for earlier SIC interventions. Patients enrolled in inpatient hospice spent a considerably shorter period of time on hospice also underscoring the importance of earlier end of life planning. Our findings indicate a need for additional interventions to facilitate earlier SIC conversations in the outpatient setting and a demand for increased palliative care access.

Communication about palliative care and end-of-life planning

2011 ◽  
pp. 513-520 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camilla Zimmermann ◽  
Amanda Caissie ◽  
Orit Freedman
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Life Planning ◽  
End Of Life Planning
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document