No abstract

Although major efforts are underway to improve end-of-life care, there is growing evidence that improvements are not being experienced by those at particularly high risk for inadequate care: minority patients. Ethnic disparities in access to end-of-life care have been found that reflect disparities in access to many other kinds of care. Additional barriers to optimum end-of-life care for minority patients include insensitivity to cultural differences in attitudes toward death and end-of-life care and understandable mistrust of the healthcare system due to the history of racism in medicine. These barriers can be categorized as institutional, cultural, and individual. Efforts to better understand and remove each type of barrier are needed. Such efforts should include quality assurance programs to better assess inequalities in access to end-of-life care, political action to address inadequate health insurance and access to medical school for minorities, and undergraduate and continuing medical education in cultural sensitivity.

The World Bank is publishing nine volumes of Disease Control Priorities, 3rd edition (DCP3) between 2015 and 2018. Volume 9, Improving Health and Reducing Poverty, summarises the main messages from all the volumes and contains cross-cutting analyses. This Review draws on all nine volumes to convey conclusions. The analysis in DCP3 is built around 21 essential packages that were developed in the nine volumes. Each essential package addresses the concerns of a major professional community (eg, child health or surgery) and contains a mix of intersectoral policies and health-sector interventions. 71 intersectoral prevention policies were identified in total, 29 of which are priorities for early introduction. Interventions within the health sector were grouped onto five platforms (population based, community level, health centre, first-level hospital, and referral hospital). DCP3 defines a model concept of essential universal health coverage (EUHC) with 218 interventions that provides a starting point for country-specific analysis of priorities. Assuming steady-state implementation by 2030, EUHC in lower-middle-income countries would reduce premature deaths by an estimated 4·2 million per year. Estimated total costs prove substantial: about 9·1% of (current) gross national income (GNI) in low-income countries and 5·2% of GNI in lower-middle-income countries. Financing provision of continuing intervention against chronic conditions accounts for about half of estimated incremental costs. For lower-middle-income countries, the mortality reduction from implementing the EUHC can only reach about half the mortality reduction in non-communicable diseases called for by the Sustainable Development Goals. Full achievement will require increased investment or sustained intersectoral action, and actions by finance ministries to tax smoking and polluting emissions and to reduce or eliminate (often large) subsidies on fossil fuels appear of central importance. DCP3 is intended to be a model starting point for analyses at the country level, but country-specific cost structures, epidemiological needs, and national priorities will generally lead to definitions of EUHC that differ from country to country and from the model in this Review. DCP3 is particularly relevant as achievement of EUHC relies increasingly on greater domestic finance, with global developmental assistance in health focusing more on global public goods. In addition to assessing effects on mortality, DCP3 looked at outcomes of EUHC not encompassed by the disability-adjusted life-year metric and related cost-effectiveness analyses. The other objectives included financial protection (potentially better provided upstream by keeping people out of the hospital rather than downstream by paying their hospital bills for them), stillbirths averted, palliative care, contraception, and child physical and intellectual growth. The first 1000 days after conception are highly important for child development, but the next 7000 days are likewise important and often neglected.

IntroductionPalliative care is rarely accessible in rural sub-Saharan Africa. Partners In Health and the Malawi government established the Neno Palliative Care Program (NPCP) to provide palliative care in rural Neno district. We conducted a situation analysis to evaluate early NPCP outcomes and better understand palliative care needs, knowledge, and preferences.MethodsEmploying rapid evaluation methodology, we collected data from 3 sources: 1) chart review of all adult patients from the NPCP’s first 9 months; 2) structured interviews with patients and caregivers; 3) semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders.ResultsThe NPCP enrolled 63 patients in its first 9 months. Frequent diagnoses were cancer (n = 50, 79%) and HIV/AIDS (n = 37 of 61, 61%). Nearly all (n = 31, 84%) patients with HIV/AIDS were on antiretroviral therapy. Providers registered 112 patient encounters, including 22 (20%) home visits. Most (n = 43, 68%) patients had documented pain at baseline, of whom 23 (53%) were treated with morphine. A majority (n = 35, 56%) had ≥1 follow-up encounter. Mean African Palliative Outcome Scale pain score decreased non-significantly between baseline and follow-up (3.0 vs. 2.7, p = 0.5) for patients with baseline pain and complete pain assessment documentation. Providers referred 48 (76%) patients for psychosocial services, including community health worker support, socioeconomic assistance, or both. We interviewed 36 patients referred to the NPCP after the chart review period. Most had cancer (n = 19, 53%) or HIV/AIDS (n = 10, 28%). Patients frequently reported needing income (n = 24, 67%) or food (n = 22, 61%). Stakeholders cited a need to make integrated palliative care widely available.ConclusionsWe identified a high prevalence of pain and psychosocial needs among patients with serious chronic illnesses in rural Malawi. Early NPCP results suggest that comprehensive palliative care can be provided in rural Africa by integrating disease-modifying treatment and palliative care, linking hospital, clinic, and home-based services, and providing psychosocial support that includes socioeconomic assistance.

Shortly before his death in 1995, Kenneth B. Schwartz, a cancer patient at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH), founded The Kenneth B. Schwartz Center at MGH. The Schwartz Center is a nonprofit organization dedicated to supporting and advancing compassionate health care delivery, which provides hope to the patient, support to caregivers, and encourages the healing process. The Center sponsors the Schwartz Center Rounds, a monthly multidisciplinary forum where caregivers reflect on important psychosocial issues faced by patients, their families, and their caregivers, and gain insight and support from fellow staff members. The case presented is of a young man dying of recurrent epithelioid hemangioendothelioma, distressed with stridor and severe pain, whose poorly controlled symptoms were successfully treated with an infusion of propofol, titrated to provide effective comfort in the last few hours of the patient's life. The tenet of double effect, which allows aggressive treatment of suffering in spite of foreseeable but unintended consequences, is reviewed. The patient's parents were invited and contributed to the Rounds, providing compelling testimony to the power of the presence of clinicians at the time of death and the importance of open communication about difficult ethical issues.

Vietnam is struggling to meet the growing need for both disease-modifying and palliative care for people with life-threatening chronic diseases such as HIV/AIDS and cancer. Recently, Vietnam initiated rapid development of a national palliative care program for HIV/AIDS and cancer patients that builds on existing palliative care programs and experience and integrates palliative care into standard HIV/AIDS and cancer care. National palliative care guidelines have been issued by the Ministry of Health based on a rapid situation analysis. Plans now call for review and revision of opioid laws and regulations to increase availability of opioids for medical use, training in palliative care for clinicians throughout the country, and development of palliative care programs both in the community and in inpatient referral centers.

In response to a request from the World Health Organization (WHO), the International Association for Hospice and Palliative Care (IAHPC) developed a List of Essential Medicines for Palliative Care based on the consensus of palliative care workers from around the world. IAHPC designed a process of five steps, which included developing a set of ethical guidelines; identifying the most common symptoms in palliative care; identifying a list of medications to treat those symptoms; carrying out a survey using a modified Delphi process with participants from developed and developing countries; and convening a meeting of representatives from regional, international, and scientific organizations to develop the final list. Twenty-one symptoms were identified as the most common in palliative care, and an initial list of 120 medications resulted from the initial survey. Seventy-one participants from developing and developed countries responded to the Delphi survey and agreed on the effectiveness and safety of 48 medications for 18 of the 21 symptoms. The final step included discussions among representatives from 26 organizations, which led to the finalization of the list. The IAHPC List of Essential Medicines for Palliative Care includes 33 medications, of which 14 are already included in the WHO Model List. The participants agreed that there is too little evidence to recommend medications for five of the symptoms and suggested that further research be carried out to solve this need. The IAHPC and all the organizations involved in this process welcome suggestions on ways to continue to improve the List of Essential Medicines for Palliative Care and to improve access to medications for patients in need.

BACKGROUND:Little is known about the quality of the patient-physician relationship for terminally ill African Americans. OBJECTIVE:To compare the quality of the patientphysician relationship between African-American and white patients and examine the extent to which relationship quality contributes to differences in advance care planning (ACP) and preferences for intensive lifesustaining treatment (LST). DESIGN: Cross sectional survey of 803 terminally ill African-American and white patients. MEASUREMENTS: Patient-reported quality of the patientphysician relationship (degree of trust, perceived respect, and joint decision making; skill in breaking bad news and listening; help in navigating the medical system), ACP, preferences for LST (cardiopulmonary resuscitation, major surgery, mechanical ventilation, and dialysis). RESULTS: The quality of the patient-physician relationship was worse for African Americans than for white patients by all measures except trust. African Americans were less likely to have an ACP (adjusted relative risk [aRR]=0.66, 95%CI=0.52-0.84), and were more likely to have a preference for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and dialysis (aRR=1.28, 95%CI=1.03-1.58; aRR=1.25, 95%CI=1.07-1.47, respectively). Additional adjustment for the quality of the patient-physician relationship had no impact on the differences in ACP and treatment preferences. CONCLUSIONS: Lower reported patient-physician relationship quality for African-American patients does not explain the observed differences between African Americans and whites in ACP and preferences for LST.KEY WORDS: end-of-life care; race/ethnicity; trust; patient-physician relationship.