Palliative care simulation for internal medicine trainees: development and pilot study

ObjectivesShape of training has recognised that ‘Managing End-of-Life and Applying Palliative Care Skills’ is a key competency for internal medicine trainees. It provides the opportunity and challenge to improve palliative care training for generalist physicians. Simulation has been recognised internationally as a holistic teaching and assessment method. This study aimed to produce a palliative medicine simulation training package for internal medicine trainees for delivery by palliative medicine trainees providing the former opportunity to practice assessment and management of patients with life-limiting illness and the latter teaching and management opportunities.MethodsA regional group of palliative medicine trainees were trained in simulation and debrief. Nominal and focus group techniques designed a simulation training package. Learning outcomes were mapped to the internal medicine curriculum descriptors.ResultsPalliative simulation for internal medicine trainees (PALL-SIM-IMT) is a training package meeting internal medicine trainees’ curriculum requirements. Regional pilots have demonstrated feasibility for delivery by palliative medicine trainees and improvement in recipients’ confidence in all curriculum descriptors.ConclusionsPALL-SIM-IMT can aid competency achievement for the provision of generalist palliative care by internal medicine trainees. It allows reciprocal development of palliative medicine trainees’ leadership and teaching skills. National adoption and evaluation is ongoing.

Generalist Palliative Care in the California Safety Net: A Structured Assessment to Design Interventions for a Range of Care Settings

Background: To provide high quality care to all patients who have serious illness, health-care systems must develop effective generalist palliative care strategies. Objective: To identify palliative care quality gaps within a range of settings in the California safety net and to develop theory-based interventions to address them. Design: Structured assessment using the National Consensus Project for Quality Palliative Care Clinical Practice Guidelines and a Predisposing, Reinforcing, and Enabling Constructs in Educational/Environmental Diagnosis and Evaluation intervention planning model-based worksheet, which integrates behavior theories to identify factors that predispose, enable, and reinforce clinicians to perform recommended behaviors. Setting and Participants: Adviser pairs—one from palliative care and one from a partner service line—from 10 California public health-care systems conducted assessments at their sites. A steering committee provided educational webinars, best practices, and assessment tools. Measurements: Adviser pairs interviewed at least 6 partner service line stakeholders to identify palliative care quality gaps, behaviors clinicians should perform to close gaps, and factors that predispose, enable, and reinforce those behaviors. Results: Partner service lines were primary care (n = 4), surgery (n = 3), emergency department (n = 2), and radiation oncology (n = 1). Selected gaps were advance care planning and goals of care communication (n = 6), identifying patients with serious illness (n = 3), and pain management (n = 1). All sites designed multiple interventions to address gaps, based on factors that predispose, enable, and reinforce a target audience to perform a target behavior. Advisers reported that the program strengthened relationships between palliative care and the partner service line Conclusion: This structured assessment helped busy clinicians develop theory-based generalist palliative care interventions.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of out-of-hours palliative care: a systematic review

Background: Out-of-hours palliative care is a priority for patients, caregivers and policymakers. Approximately three quarters of the week occurs outside of typical working hours, and the need for support in care of serious and terminal illness during these times is commonplace. Evidence on relevant interventions is unclear. Aim: To review systematically the evidence on the effect of out-of-hours specialist or generalist palliative care for adults on patient and caregiver outcomes, and costs and cost-effectiveness. Methods: A systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature was conducted. We searched Embase, MEDLINE [Ovid], Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Allied and Complementary Medicine [Ovid], PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus, EconLit (Ovid), and grey literature published between 1 January 2000 and 12th November 2019. Studies that comparatively evaluated the effect of out-of-hours specialist or generalist palliative care for adults on patient and caregiver outcomes, and on costs and cost-effectiveness were eligible, irrespective of design. Only English-language studies were eligible. Two reviewers independently examined the returned studies at each stage (title and abstract review, full-text review, and quality assessment). Results: We identified one eligible peer-reviewed study, judged as insufficient quality. Other sources returned no eligible material. The systematic review therefore included no studies. Conclusions: The importance of integrated, 24-hour care for people in line with a palliative care approach is not reflected in the literature, which lacks evidence on the effects of interventions provided outside typical working hours. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42018111041.

How are physicians delivering palliative care? A population-based retrospective cohort study describing the mix of generalist and specialist palliative care models in the last year of life

Background: To enable coordinated palliative care delivery, all clinicians should have basic palliative care skill sets (‘generalist palliative care’). Specialists should have skills for managing complex and difficult cases (‘specialist palliative care’) and co-exist to support generalists through consultation care and transfer of care. Little information exists about the actual mixes of generalist and specialist palliative care. Aim: To describe the models of physician-based palliative care services delivered to patients in the last 12 months of life. Design: This is a population-based retrospective cohort study using linked health care administrative data. Setting/participants: Physicians providing palliative care services to a decedent cohort in Ontario, Canada. The decedent cohort consisted of all adults (18+ years) who died in Ontario, Canada between April 2011 and March 2015 ( n = 361,951). Results: We describe four major models of palliative care services: (1) 53.0% of decedents received no physician-based palliative care, (2) 21.2% received only generalist palliative care, (3) 14.7% received consultation palliative care (i.e. care from both specialists and generalists), and (4) 11.1% received only specialist palliative care. Among physicians providing palliative care ( n = 11,006), 95.3% had a generalist palliative care focus and 4.7% a specialist focus; 74.2% were trained as family physicians. Conclusion: We examined how often a coordinated palliative care model is delivered to a large decedent cohort and identified that few actually received consultation care. The majority of care, in both the palliative care generalist and specialist models, was delivered by family physicians. Further research should evaluate how different models of care impact patient outcomes and costs.