BackgroundIdiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a progressive disease with median survival from 2 to 7 years. Palliative care is an important part of patients´ care as lung transplantation is not an option for the majority of patients. The aim of this study was to describe treatment practices, decision-making and symptoms during end-of-life care of IPF patients.MethodsWe identified 59 deceased patients from a national prospective IPF cohort study (FinnishIPF) and analyzed retrospectively their health care documentation during the 6 months that preceded death.ResultsHospital was the place of death for 47 patients (80 %). A majority of the patients (93 %) were hospitalized for a mean of 30 days (range 1–96 days) during the last 6 months of their life. Altogether, patients spent 15 % of their last 6 months of life in a hospital. End-of-life decisions and do not resuscitate (DNR) orders were made for 19 (32 %) and 34 (57 %) of the patients, respectively, and 22 (42 %) of these decisions were made ≤ 3 days prior to death.During the final hospital stay, antibiotics were given to 79 % and non-invasive ventilation to 36 % of patients. During the last 24 h of life, radiologic imaging or laboratory tests were taken in 19 % and 53 % of the hospitalized patients, respectively. These tests and life prolonging therapies were more common in tertiary hospitals compared to other places of death. Dyspnea (66 %) and pain (31 %) were the most common symptoms recorded. Opioids were prescribed to 71 % of the patients during the last week before death.ConclusionsThe majority of IPF patients died in a hospital with ongoing life-prolonging procedures until death. The frequent use of opioids is an indicator of an intention to relieve symptoms, but end-of-life decisions were still made very late. Early integrated palliative care with advance care plan could improve the end-of-life care of dying IPF patients.

The Finnish Medical Society Duodecim initiated and managed the update of the Finnish national guideline for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The Finnish COPD guideline was revised to acknowledge the progress in diagnosis and management of COPD. This Finnish COPD guideline in English language is a part of the original guideline and focuses on the diagnosis, assessment and pharmacotherapy of stable COPD. It is intended to be used mainly in primary health care but not forgetting respiratory specialists and other healthcare workers. The new recommendations and statements are based on the best evidence available from the medical literature, other published national guidelines and the GOLD (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease) report. This guideline introduces the diagnostic approach, differential diagnostics towards asthma, assessment and treatment strategy to control symptoms and to prevent exacerbations. The pharmacotherapy is based on the symptoms and a clinical phenotype of the individual patient. The guideline defines three clinically relevant phenotypes including the low and high exacerbation risk phenotypes and the neglected asthma–COPD overlap syndrome (ACOS). These clinical phenotypes can help clinicians to identify patients that respond to specific pharmacological interventions. For the low exacerbation risk phenotype, pharmacotherapy with short-acting β2-agonists (salbutamol, terbutaline) or anticholinergics (ipratropium) or their combination (fenoterol–ipratropium) is recommended in patients with less symptoms. If short-acting bronchodilators are not enough to control symptoms, a long-acting β2-agonist (formoterol, indacaterol, olodaterol or salmeterol) or a long-acting anticholinergic (muscarinic receptor antagonists; aclidinium, glycopyrronium, tiotropium, umeclidinium) or their combination is recommended. For the high exacerbation risk phenotype, pharmacotherapy with a long-acting anticholinergic or a fixed combination of an inhaled glucocorticoid and a long-acting β2-agonist (budesonide–formoterol, beclomethasone dipropionate–formoterol, fluticasone propionate–salmeterol or fluticasone furoate–vilanterol) is recommended as a first choice. Other treatment options for this phenotype include combination of long-acting bronchodilators given from separate inhalers or as a fixed combination (glycopyrronium–indacaterol or umeclidinium–vilanterol) or a triple combination of an inhaled glucocorticoid, a long-acting β2-agonist and a long-acting anticholinergic. If the patient has severe-to-very severe COPD (FEV1 < 50% predicted), chronic bronchitis and frequent exacerbations despite long-acting bronchodilators, the pharmacotherapy may include also roflumilast. ACOS is a phenotype of COPD in which there are features that comply with both asthma and COPD. Patients belonging to this phenotype have usually been excluded from studies evaluating the effects of drugs both in asthma and in COPD. Thus, evidence-based recommendation of treatment cannot be given. The treatment should cover b...

Background: Paramedics commonly face acute crises of patients in palliative care, but their involvement in end-of-life care is not planned systematically. Aim: To evaluate a protocol for end-of-life care at home including pre-planned integration of paramedics and end-of-life care wards. Design: Paramedic visits to patients in end-of-life care protocol were retrospectively studied. Setting/Participants: All of the patients who had registered for the protocol between 1 March 2015 and 28 February 2017 in North Karelia, Finland, were included in this study. Results: A total of 256 patients were registered for the protocol and 306 visits by paramedic were needed. A need for symptom control (38%) and transportation (29%) were the most common reasons for a visit. Paramedics visited 43% and 70% of the patients in areas with and without 24/7 palliative home care services, respectively ( p < 0.001); while 58% of all the visits were done outside of office hours. Problems were resolved at home in 31% of the visits. The patient was transferred to a pre-planned end-of-life care ward and to an emergency department in 48% and 16% of the cases, respectively. More patients died in end-of-life care wards in areas without (54%) than with (33%) 24/7 home care services ( p = 0.001). Conclusions: Integration of paramedics into end-of-life care at home is reasonable especially in rural areas without 24/7 palliative care services and outside of office hours. The majority of patients can be managed at home or with the help of an end-of-life care ward without an emergency visit.