Objective To describe models used in successful clinical initiatives to improve the quality of palliative care in critical care settings. Data Sources We searched the MEDLINE database from inception to April 2010 for all English language articles using the terms “intensive care,” “critical care,” or “ICU” and “palliative care”; we also hand-searched reference lists and author files. Based on review and synthesis of these data and the experiences of our interdisciplinary expert Advisory Board, we prepared this consensus report. Data Extraction and Synthesis We critically reviewed the existing data with a focus on models that have been used to structure clinical initiatives to enhance palliative care for critically ill patients in intensive care units and their families. Conclusions There are two main models for intensive care unit–palliative care integration: 1) the “consultative model,” which focuses on increasing the involvement and effectiveness of palliative care consultants in the care of intensive care unit patients and their families, particularly those patients identified as at highest risk for poor outcomes; and 2) the “integrative model,” which seeks to embed palliative care principles and interventions into daily practice by the intensive care unit team for all patients and families facing critical illness. These models are not mutually exclusive but rather represent the ends of a spectrum of approaches. Choosing an overall approach from among these models should be one of the earliest steps in planning an intensive care unit–palliative care initiative. This process entails a careful and realistic assessment of available resources, attitudes of key stakeholders, structural aspects of intensive care unit care, and patterns of local practice in the intensive care unit and hospital. A well-structured intensive care unit–palliative care initiative can provide important benefits for patients, families, and providers.
The values that parents find most important during decision-making regarding delivery room resuscitation may not be addressed routinely in prenatal counseling. Parents and physicians may have different interpretations of what is discussed and what decisions are made. Future work should investigate whether physicians can be trained to address effectively parents' values during the decision-making process and whether addressing these values may improve physician-parent communication and lead to better postdecision outcomes for parents.
AbstrAct:The mission of the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association includes increasing access to high-quality, evidencebased care that improves patient outcomes such as health-related quality of life and is consistent with the patients' values, preferences, and goals. Awareness of and access to palliative care interventions align with the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association mission. The purposes of this policy statement are to provide background on the importance of palliative care as it pertains to patients with advanced cardiovascular disease and stroke and their families and to make recommendations for policy decisions. Palliative care, defined as patient-and family-centered care that optimizes health-related quality of life by anticipating, preventing, and treating suffering, should be integrated into the care of all patients with advanced cardiovascular disease and stroke early in the disease trajectory. Palliative care focuses on communication, shared decision making about treatment options, advance care planning, and attention to physical, emotional, spiritual, and psychological distress with inclusion of the patient's family and care system. Our policy recommendations address the following: reimbursement for comprehensive delivery of palliative care services for patients with advanced cardiovascular disease and stroke; strong payerprovider relationships that involve data sharing to identify patients in need of palliative care, identification of better care and payment models, and establishment of quality standards and outcome measurements; healthcare system policies for the provision of comprehensive palliative care services during hospitalization, including goals of care, treatment decisions, needs of family caregivers, and transition to other care settings; and health professional education in palliative care as part of licensure requirements.
Purpose Pain, dyspnea, and thirst are three of the most prevalent, intense, and distressing symptoms of intensive care unit (ICU) patients. In this report, the interdisciplinary Advisory Board of the Improving Palliative Care in the ICU(IPAL-ICU) Project brings together expertise in both critical care and palliative care along with current information to address challenges in assessment and management. Methods We conducted a comprehensive review of literature focusing on intensive care and palliative care research related to palliation of pain, dyspnea, and thirst. Results Evidence-based methods to assess pain are the enlarged 0–10 Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for ICU patients able to self-report and the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool or Behavior Pain Scale for patients who cannot report symptoms verbally or non-verbally. The Respiratory Distress Observation Scale is the only known behavioral scale for assessment of dyspnea, and thirst is evaluated by patient self-report using an 0–10 NRS. Opioids remain the mainstay for pain management, and all available intravenous opioids, when titrated to similar pain intensity end points, are equally effective. Dyspnea is treated (with or without invasive or noninvasive mechanical ventilation) by optimizing the underlying etiological condition, patient positioning and, sometimes, supplemental oxygen. Several oral interventions are recommended to alleviate thirst. Systematized improvement efforts addressing symptom management and assessment can be implemented in ICUs. Conclusions Relief of symptom distress is a key component of critical care for all ICU patients, regardless of condition or prognosis. Evidence-based approaches for assessment and treatment together with well-designed work systems can help ensure comfort and related favorable outcomes for the critically ill.
BACKGROUND: Families must process complex information related to neonatal encephalopathy and therapeutic hypothermia.
Mothers perceived that a consultation with a neonatologist, which included a NICU tour, prepared them for the perinatal course. Parents want realistic medical information, specific to their situation, provided in an empathetic manner and want to be allowed to hope for the best possible outcome.
Chronically critically ill pediatric patients represent an emerging population in NICUs and PICUs. Chronic critical illness has been recognized and defined in the adult population, but the same attention has not been systematically applied to pediatrics. This article reviews what is currently known about pediatric chronic critical illness, highlighting the unique aspects of chronic critical illness in infants and children, including specific considerations of prognosis, outcomes, and decision-making. We propose a definition that incorporates NICU versus PICU stays, recurrent ICU admissions, dependence on life-sustaining technology, multiorgan dysfunction, underlying medical complexity, and the developmental implications of congenital versus acquired conditions. We propose a research agenda, highlighting existing knowledge gaps and targeting areas of improvement in clinical care, research, and policy.
Use of specific criteria to prompt proactive referral for palliative care consultation seems to help reduce utilization of ICU resources without changing mortality, while increasing involvement of palliative care specialists for critically ill patients and families in need. Existing data and resources can be used in developing such criteria, which should be tailored for a specific ICU, implemented through an organized process involving key stakeholders, and evaluated by appropriate measures. In some settings, other strategies for increasing access to palliative care may be more appropriate.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.