Over the past five decades, palliative care has evolved from serving patients at the end of life into a highly specialized discipline focused on delivering supportive care to patients with ...life-limiting illnesses throughout the disease trajectory. A growing body of evidence is now available to inform the key domains in the practice of palliative care, including symptom management, psychosocial care, communication, decision-making, and end-of-life care. Findings from multiple studies indicate that integrating palliative care early in the disease trajectory can result in improvements in quality of life, symptom control, patient and caregiver satisfaction, illness understanding, quality of end-of-life care, survival, and costs of care. In this narrative Review, we discuss various strategies to integrate oncology and palliative care by optimizing clinical infrastructures, processes, education, and research. The goal of integration is to maximize patient access to palliative care and, ultimately, to improve patient outcomes. We provide a conceptual model for the integration of supportive and/or palliative care with primary and oncological care. We also discuss how health-care systems and institutions need to tailor integration based on their resources, size, and the level of primary palliative care available.
The practice of pediatric/neonatal interfacility transport continues to expand. Transport teams have evolved into mobile ICUs capable of delivering state-of-the-art critical care during pediatric and ...neonatal transport. The most recent document regarding the practice of pediatric/neonatal transport is more than a decade old. The following article details changes in the practice of interfacility transport over the past decade and expresses the consensus views of leaders in the field of transport medicine, including the American Academy of Pediatrics' Section on Transport Medicine.
Hospital Pharmacy Service (HPS) in Spain have been impacted by the health crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, the outbreak has forced HPSs to adapt their outpatient consultation services ...to Telepharmacy to optimize clinical outcomes and reduce the risk of contagion. The purpose of this article is to describe and analyze the experience of HPSs with outpatient Telepharmacy during the COVID-19 pandemic and expose the lessons learned. Measures have been adopted in on-site outpatient pharmacy clinics to prevent exposure of patients and professionals to the virus. These measures are based on national and international recommendations on social distancing and hygiene. With regard to remote outpatient pharmacy services, teleconsultation with drug dispensing has been promoted based on five basic procedures, each with its advantages and limitations: home drug delivery from HPSs, with the advantage of universal access and the limitation of entailing a substantial investment in resources; HPS coordination with primary care pharmacists, which requires no investments but with limited access to some geographic areas; HPS coordination with community pharmacists based on a large network of pharmacies, which requires the patient to go to the pharmacy, without confidentiality being guaranteed for any patient; geolocation and hospital-based medication dispensing, which provides universal access and direct traceability, but entails investment in human resources; and HPS coordination with associations of patients, which does not entail any additional cost but limits the information available on the diseases of society members. Three main lessons have been learned during the pandemic: the satisfactory capacity of HPS to provide outpatient pharmacy consultation services in the setting of a public health crisis; the usefulness of Telepharmacy for the clinical follow-up, healthcare coordination, outpatient counseling, and informed dispensing and delivery of medication (with a high level of satisfaction among patients); and the need to foster Telepharmacy as a complementary tool through a mixed model of outpatient pharmacy consultation service that incorporates the advantages of each procedure and adapts to the individual needs of each patient in a context of humanized healthcare.
The traditional hospital-based model of cardiac rehabilitation faces substantial challenges, such as cost and accessibility. These challenges have led to the development of alternative models of ...cardiac rehabilitation in recent years. The aim of this study was to identify and critique evidence for the effectiveness of these alternative models. A total of 22 databases were searched to identify quantitative studies or systematic reviews of quantitative studies regarding the effectiveness of alternative models of cardiac rehabilitation. Included studies were appraised using a Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool and the National Health and Medical Research Council's designations for Level of Evidence. The 83 included articles described interventions in the following broad categories of alternative models of care: multifactorial individualized telehealth, internet based, telehealth focused on exercise, telehealth focused on recovery, community- or home-based, and complementary therapies. Multifactorial individualized telehealth and community- or home-based cardiac rehabilitation are effective alternative models of cardiac rehabilitation, as they have produced similar reductions in cardiovascular disease risk factors compared with hospital-based programmes. While further research is required to address the paucity of data available regarding the effectiveness of alternative models of cardiac rehabilitation in rural, remote, and culturally and linguistically diverse populations, our review indicates there is no need to rely on hospital-based strategies alone to deliver effective cardiac rehabilitation. Local healthcare systems should strive to integrate alternative models of cardiac rehabilitation, such as brief telehealth interventions tailored to individual's risk factor profiles as well as community- or home-based programmes, in order to ensure there are choices available for patients that best fit their needs, risk factor profile, and preferences.
In January 2015, we created a multidisciplinary Aortic Center with the collaboration of Vascular Surgery, Cardiac Surgery, Interventional Radiology, Anesthesia and Hospital Administration. We report ...the initial success of creating a Comprehensive Aortic Center.
All aortic procedures performed from January 1, 2015 until December 31, 2016 were entered into a prospectively collected database and compared with available data for 2014. Primary outcomes included the number of all aortic related procedures, transfer acceptance rate, transfer time, and proportion of elective/emergent referrals.
The Aortic Center included 5 vascular surgeons, 2 cardiac surgeons, and 2 interventional radiologists. Workflow processes were implemented to streamline patient transfers as well as physician and operating room notification. Total aortic volume increased significantly from 162 to 261 patients. This reflected an overall 59% (P = 0.0167) increase in all aorta-related procedures. We had a 65% overall increase in transfer requests with 156% increase in acceptance of referrals and 136% drop in transfer denials (P < 0.0001). Emergent abdominal aortic cases accounted for 17% (n = 45) of our total aortic volume in 2015. The average transfer time from request to arrival decreased from 515 to 352 min, although this change was not statistically significant. We did see a significant increase in the use of air-transfers for aortic patients (P = 0.0041). Factorial analysis showed that time for transfer was affected only by air-transfer use, regardless of the year the patient was transferred. Transfer volume and volume of aortic related procedures remained stable in 2016.
Designation as a comprehensive Aortic Center with implementation of strategic workflow systems and a culture of "no refusal of transfers" resulted in a significant increase in aortic volume for both emergent and elective aortic cases. Case volumes increased for all specialties involved in the center. Improvements in transfer center and emergency medical services communication demonstrated a trend toward more efficient transfer times. These increases and improvements were sustainable for 2 years after this designation.
Despite significant gains by pediatric collaborative improvement networks, the overall US system of chronic illness care does not work well. A new paradigm is needed: a Collaborative Chronic Care ...Network (C3N). A C3N is a network-based production system that harnesses the collective intelligence of patients, clinicians, and researchers and distributes the production of knowledge, information, and know-how over large groups of people, dramatically accelerating the discovery process. A C3N is a platform of "operating systems" on which interconnected processes and interventions are designed, tested, and implemented. The social operating system is facilitated by community building, engaging all stakeholders and their expertise, and providing multiple ways to participate. Standard progress measures and a robust information technology infrastructure enable the technical operating system to reduce unwanted variation and adopt advances more rapidly. A structured approach to innovation design provides a scientific operating system or "laboratory" for what works and how to make it work. Data support testing and research on multiple levels: comparative effectiveness research for populations, evaluating care delivery processes at the care center level, and N-of-1 trials and other methods to select the best treatment of individual patient circumstances. Methods to reduce transactional costs to participate include a Federated IRB Model in which centers rely on a protocol approved at 1 central institutional review board and a "commons framework" for organizational copyright and intellectual property concerns. A fully realized C3N represents a discontinuous leap to a self-developing learning health system capable of producing a qualitatively different approach to improving health.
Nearly half of Americans with diagnosed hypertension have uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) while some integrated healthcare systems, such as Kaiser Permanente Northern California, have achieved ...control rates upwards 90%.
We adapted Kaiser Permanente's evidence-based treatment protocols in a racially and ethnically diverse population at 12 safety-net clinics in the San Francisco Health Network. The intervention consisted of 4 elements: a hypertension registry, a simplified treatment intensification protocol that included fixed-dose combination medications containing diuretics, standardized BP measurement protocol, and BP check visits led by registered nurse and pharmacist staff. The study population comprised patients with hypertension who made ≥1 primary care visits within the past 24 months (n=15 917) and had a recorded BP measurement within the past 12 months. We conducted a postintervention time series analysis from August 2014 to August 2016 to assess the effect of the intervention on BP control for 24 months for the pilot site and for 15 months for 11 other San Francisco Health Network clinics combined. Secondary outcomes were changes in use of guideline-recommended medication prescribing. Rates of BP control increased at the pilot site (68%-74%;
<0.01) and the 11 other San Francisco Health Network clinic sites (69%-74%;
<0.01). Statistically significant improvements in BP control rates (
<0.01) at the 11 San Francisco Health Network clinic sites occurred in all racial and ethnic groups (blacks, 60%-66%; whites, 69%-75%; Latinos, 67%-72%; Asians, 78%-82%). Use of fixed-dose combination medications increased from 10% to 13% (
<0.01), and the percentage of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor prescriptions dispensed in combination with a thiazide diuretic increased from 36% to 40% (
<0.01).
Evidence-based system approaches to improving BP control can be implemented in safety-net settings and could play a pivotal role in achieving improved population BP control and reducing hypertension disparities.
Full integration of oncology and palliative care relies on the specific knowledge and skills of two modes of care: the tumour-directed approach, the main focus of which is on treating the disease; ...and the host-directed approach, which focuses on the patient with the disease. This Commission addresses how to combine these two paradigms to achieve the best outcome of patient care. Randomised clinical trials on integration of oncology and palliative care point to health gains: improved survival and symptom control, less anxiety and depression, reduced use of futile chemotherapy at the end of life, improved family satisfaction and quality of life, and improved use of health-care resources. Early delivery of patient-directed care by specialist palliative care teams alongside tumour-directed treatment promotes patient-centred care. Systematic assessment and use of patient-reported outcomes and active patient involvement in the decisions about cancer care result in better symptom control, improved physical and mental health, and better use of health-care resources. The absence of international agreements on the content and standards of the organisation, education, and research of palliative care in oncology are major barriers to successful integration. Other barriers include the common misconception that palliative care is end-of-life care only, stigmatisation of death and dying, and insufficient infrastructure and funding. The absence of established priorities might also hinder integration more widely. This Commission proposes the use of standardised care pathways and multidisciplinary teams to promote integration of oncology and palliative care, and calls for changes at the system level to coordinate the activities of professionals, and for the development and implementation of new and improved education programmes, with the overall goal of improving patient care. Integration raises new research questions, all of which contribute to improved clinical care. When and how should palliative care be delivered? What is the optimal model for integrated care? What is the biological and clinical effect of living with advanced cancer for years after diagnosis? Successful integration must challenge the dualistic perspective of either the tumour or the host, and instead focus on a merged approach that places the patient's perspective at the centre. To succeed, integration must be anchored by management and policy makers at all levels of health care, followed by adequate resource allocation, a willingness to prioritise goals and needs, and sustained enthusiasm to help generate support for better integration. This integrated model must be reflected in international and national cancer plans, and be followed by developments of new care models, education and research programmes, all of which should be adapted to the specific cultural contexts within which they are situated. Patient-centred care should be an integrated part of oncology care independent of patient prognosis and treatment intention. To achieve this goal it must be based on changes in professional cultures and priorities in health care.
PDF
