The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has highlighted the need for health care providers skilled in rapid and flexible decision making, effective and anticipatory leadership, and in dealing with trauma and moral distress. Palliative care (PC) workers have been an essential part of the COVID-19 response in advising on goals of care, symptom management and difficult decision making, and in supporting distressed health care workers, patients, and families. We describe Global Palliative Education Collaborative (GPEC), a training partnership between Harvard, University of California San Francisco, and Tulane medical schools in the U.S.; and two international PC programs in Uganda and India. GPEC offers U.S.-based PC fellows participation in an international elective to learn about resource-limited PC provision, gain perspective on global challenges to caring for patients at the end of life, and cultivate resiliency. International PC colleagues have much to teach about practicing compassionate PC amidst resource constraints and humanitarian crisis. We also describe a novel educational project that our GPEC faculty and fellows are participating indthe Resilience Inspiration Storytelling Empathy Projectdand discuss positive outcomes of the project.
Purpose of reviewSouth Asia, with a population of 1.79 billion, has close to 9.9 million individuals experiencing serious health-related suffering (SHS). South Asia accounts for 10.23% of the world's cancer incidence. The prevalence of cancer mortality in the region is 68.44%, significantly higher than the world average of 59.74%. This poor outcome highlights the need to focus on SHS in the region. This review was undertaken to assess the current status of palliative care inequities in the region and to guide future action.
Recent findingsUsing morphine-equivalent doses of opioid analgesics (excluding methadone) per cancer death as a proxy measure for access to palliative care, the International Narcotics Control Board data in 2020 show poor access to palliative care. Less than 4% of those in need are able to access palliative care in India, whereas in Afghanistan only 0.2% have access. Inappropriate end-of-life care (EOLC) and catastrophic out-of-pocket health expenditure compound the problem.
Introduction:
In mid-March 2020, the Kerala government implemented additional preventive measures to the steps already taken to reduce the transmission of COVID-19. Strategies were taken by a non-governmental palliative care organisation (Pallium India) with Coastal Students Cultural Forum – a coastal area-based collective of young educated people in the coastal region to address the medical needs of people living in this community. The facilitated partnership lasted 6 months (July–December 2020) and addressed the palliative care needs of the community in the selected coastal regions during the first wave of the pandemic. Volunteers sensitised by the NGO identified more than 209 patients. The current article highlights the reflective narratives of key players in this facilitated community partnership.
Materials and Method:
The current article is dedicated to highlighting the reflective narratives of key players in this facilitate community partnership to the readers of this journal. The palliative care team’s overall experience was collected from selected key participants to understand the program’s impact, identify areas of improvement, and discuss possible solutions if there were any challenges. The contents below are their statements on the experience of the entire program.
Conclusion:
Palliative care delivery programmes must be configured to respond to local needs and customs, be community-based and integrated with local health and social care and have accessible referral pathways between and across services. They must also be responsive to changing individual and population needs and shifts in local and national health structures.
Methods Notes of 20 patients who died in Aneurin Bevan Health Board during the COVID-19 pandemic were audited for discussions of PPD and TEPs. Results Even in cases where patients remained stable after the decision for supportive care was made, only in one case was PPD discussion documented. In contrast, in almost all cases there was a DNAR in place that was also discussed with the patient and/or family. Conclusions Discussing TEPs is not necessarily the equivalent of robust joint decision-making. As we continue to manage dying patients during the pandemic, factors influencing PPD discussions in view of the wider context of end-of-life discussions should be considered. There is scope for research into how the COVID-19 pandemic has influenced or changed the quality of end-of-life discussions in secondary care to ensure patient-centred care moving forward.
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.