Explore the vast range of titles available.

PurposeThe integration of palliative care into intensive care units (ICUs) is advocated to mitigate physical and psychological burdens for patients and their families, and to improve end-of-life care. The most efficacious palliative care interventions, the optimal model of their delivery and the most appropriate outcome measures in ICU are not clear.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of randomised clinical trials and observational studies to evaluate the number and types of palliative care interventions implemented within the ICU setting, to assess their impact on ICU practice and to evaluate differences in palliative care approaches across different countries.ResultsFifty-eight full articles were identified, including 9 randomised trials and 49 cohort studies; all but 4 were conducted within North America. Interventions were categorised into five themes: communication (14, 24.6%), ethics consultations (5, 8.8%), educational (18, 31.6%), involvement of a palliative care team (28, 49.1%) and advance care planning or goals-of-care discussions (7, 12.3%). Thirty studies (51.7%) proposed an integrative model, whilst 28 (48.3%) reported a consultative one. The most frequently reported outcomes were ICU or hospital length of stay (33/55, 60%), limitation of life-sustaining treatment decisions (22/55, 40%) and mortality (15/55, 27.2%). Quantitative assessment of pooled data was not performed due to heterogeneity in interventions and outcomes between studies.ConclusionBeneficial effects on the most common outcomes were associated with strategies to enhance palliative care involvement, either with an integrative or a consultative approach. Few studies reported functional outcomes for ICU patients. Almost all studies were from North America, limiting the generalisability to other healthcare systems.

Yet, this approach may be associated with poorer surrogate mood outcomes (5). Yet, unless desired by the surrogate, giving \"false hope\" is inherently parentalistic and violates the ethical principle of respecting autonomy. [...]due to personal and/or ethical objections, some clinicians may frankly avoid approach 3. [...]we should not be surprised if studies suggest that surrogates given bad news may have poorer mood outcomes than those who receive no, or selective \"good,\" news. [...]patient and surrogate prioritization of these diverse and sometimes competing outcomes are also unknown; some surrogates might prefer an increase in proximal anxiety in exchange for a decrease in long-term complicated grief and/or improved quality of death and dying for the patient.

Although practices and preferences for the location of end-of-life care vary between countries, cultures, and individuals, many people die in hospitals.1-4 Thus, studies exploring how to better provide compassionate and effective end-of-life care in hospitals are important and needed.

Glioblastoma (GBM) has a median overall survival of 16–21 months. As patients with GBM suffer concurrently from terminal cancer and a disease with progressive neurocognitive decline, advance care planning (ACP) and palliative care (PC) are critical. We conducted a systematic review exploring published literature on the prevalence of ACP, end-of-life (EOL) services utilization (including PC services), and experiences among adults with GBM. We searched from database inception until 20 December 2020. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews guidelines were followed. Included studies were assessed for quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The 16 articles were all nonrandomized studies conducted in six countries with all but two published in 2014 or later. ACP documentation varied from 4–55%, PC referral was pursued in 39–40% of cases, and hospice referrals were made for 66–76% of patients. Hospitalizations frequently occurred at the EOL with 20–56% of patients spending over 25% of their overall survival time hospitalized. Many GBM patients do not pursue ACP or have access to PC. There is a dearth of focused and high-quality studies on ACP, PC, and hospice use among adults with GBM. Prospective studies that address these and additional aspects related to EOL care, such as healthcare costs and inpatient supportive care needs, are needed.

The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) recently convened an Ad Hoc Palliative Care Expert Panel to update a 2012 provisional clinical opinion by conducting a systematic review of clinical trials in palliative care in oncology. The key takeaways from the updated ASCO clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are that more people should be referred to interdisciplinary palliative care teams and that more palliative care specialists and palliative care–trained oncologists are needed to meet this demand. The following summary statement is based on multiple randomized clinical trials: “Inpatients and outpatients with advanced cancer should receive dedicated palliative care services, early in the disease course, concurrent with active treatment. Referral of patients to interdisciplinary palliative care teams is optimal, and services may complement existing programs” (J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(1):96). This paper addresses potential epidemiologic and policy interpretations and implications of the ASCO CPGs. Our review of the CPGs demonstrates that to have clinicians implement these guidelines, there is a need for support from stakeholders across the health-care continuum, health system and institutional change, and changes in health-care financing. Because of rising costs and the need to improve value, the need for coordinated care, and change in end-of-life care patterns, many of these changes are already underway.

Background Effective communication is an interaction between two or more people that produces a desired effect and is a key element of quality of care for patients with advanced and serious illness and their family members. Suboptimal provider-patient/family communication is common, with negative effects on patient/family-centered outcomes. Objectives To systematically review the evidence for effectiveness of communication-related quality improvement interventions for patients with advanced and serious illness and to explore the effectiveness of consultative and integrative interventions. Data Sources MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane, and DARE from 2000 through December 2011 and reference list of eligible articles and reviews. Study Eligibility Criteria, Participants And Interventions Prospective, controlled quality improvement studies in populations with life-limiting or severe life-threatening illness with a primary intervention focus of improving communication with patients and/or families. Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods Two investigators independently screened and abstracted data on patient/family-centered outcomes. Results We included 20 studies; 13 (65 %) were in intensive care. We found four intervention types: (1) family meetings with the usual team (11 studies, 77 % found improvement in healthcare utilization), (2) palliative care teams (5 studies, 50 % found improvement in healthcare utilization), (3) ethics consultation (2 studies, 100 % found improvement in healthcare utilization), and (4) physician-patient communication (2 studies, no significant improvement in healthcare utilization). Among studies addressing the outcomes of patient/family satisfaction, 22 % found improvement; among studies addressing healthcare utilization (e.g., length of stay), 73 % found improvement. Results suggest that consultative interventions, as opposed to integrative ones, may be more effective, but more research is needed. Limitations Study heterogeneity did not allow quantitative synthesis. Conclusions and Implications of Key Findings Communication in the care of patients with advanced and serious illness can be improved using quality improvement interventions, particularly for healthcare utilization as an outcome. Interventions may be more effective using a consultative approach.