Search

Background: The Surprise Question ('Would I be surprised if this patient died within 12 months?') identifies patients in the last year of life. It is unclear if 'surprised' means the same for each clinician, and whether their responses are internally consistent. Aim: To determine the consistency with which the Surprise Question is used. Design: A cross-sectional online study of participants located in Belgium, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Switzerland and UK. Participants completed 20 hypothetical patient summaries ('vignettes'). Primary outcome measure: continuous estimate of probability of death within 12 months (0% [certain survival]–100% [certain death]). A threshold (probability estimate above which Surprise Question responses were consistently 'no') and an inconsistency range (range of probability estimates where respondents vacillated between responses) were calculated. Univariable and multivariable linear regression explored differences in consistency. Trial registration: NCT03697213. Setting/participants: Registered General Practitioners (GPs). Of the 307 GPs who started the study, 250 completed 15 or more vignettes. Results: Participants had a consistency threshold of 49.8% (SD 22.7) and inconsistency range of 17% (SD 22.4). Italy had a significantly higher threshold than other countries (p = 0.002). There was also a difference in threshold levels depending on age of clinician, for every yearly increase, participants had a higher threshold. There was no difference in inconsistency between countries (p = 0.53). Conclusions: There is variation between clinicians regarding the use of the Surprise Question. Over half of GPs were not internally consistent in their responses to the Surprise Question. Future research with standardised terms and real patients is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Demographic change and the medical imperative to accompany patients at all times and also in the case of illness leading to death require good basic knowledge of palliative care in large parts of the medical profession. Palliative care has been introduced into undergraduate medical education as a compulsory subject: "interdisciplinary subject 13 palliative care" (Q13). While course concepts for Q13 have already been positively evaluated, assessment of the consolidation and practical relevance of the knowledge taught is lacking. Methods: Assessment of the consolidation of the learning content from Q13 after the practical year (the "practical year" is the sixth and final year of undergraduate medical education in Germany) by means of a survey with a proven questionnaire and integrated qualitative free-text analysis of a cohort of medical students (n=176) who had already participated in an evaluation before and after Q13. Results: The response rate was 96% after Q13 and 45% after the practical year (PY). Teaching was predominantly perceived as more helpful than the PY (p<0.001). Compared to the status after Q13, students rated themselves as less competent after the PY in all areas surveyed, including drug-based pain therapy (p=0.0386). The certainty in informing patients about the incurability of the disease also decreased significantly after the PY (p=0.0117), although the preparation in Q13 was positively highlighted. Conclusion: The knowledge acquired in Q13 could not be anchored in the PY. On the contrary, after initial practical experiences, the students found it challenging to conduct conversations in cases of serious illness and to deal with their own uncertainty in the care of seriously ill patients. Structural factors regarding palliative care in the PY, as well as intrinsic motives of students, such as prior knowledge or motivation to learn, should be analyzed to identify ways to close the gap between theoretical and practical training in general palliative care. To generate samples that are sufficiently representative, future studies on teaching should be easily accessible to students and consider attractive forms of evaluation including electronic methods and social media. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Early integration of palliative care can improve outcomes for people with cancer and non-cancer diagnoses. However, prediction of survival for individuals is challenging, in particular in patients with haematological malignancies who are known to have limited access to palliative care. The 'Surprise'-Question can be used to facilitate referral to palliative care. Aim: To explore experiences, views and perceptions of haemato-oncologists on the use of the 'Surprise'-Question in the haemato-oncology outpatients clinics of a university hospital in Germany. Design: A qualitative study using individual semi-structured interviews transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically based on the framework approach. Setting/participants: The study took place at the haemato-oncology outpatient clinic and the bone marrow transplantation outpatient clinic of a university hospital. Nine haemato-oncologists participated in qualitative interviews. Results: Thematic analysis identified 4 themes and 11 subthemes: (1) meaning and relevance of the 'Surprise'-Question; (2) feasibility; (3) the concept of 'surprise' and (4) personal aspects of prognostication. A key function of the 'Surprise'-Question was to stimulate intuition and promote patient-centred goals of care by initiating a process of pause → reflection → change of perspective. It was easy and quick to use, but required time and communication skills to act on. Participants' training in palliative care enhanced their willingness to use the 'Surprise'-Question. Conclusion: Irrespective of its use in prognostication, the 'Surprise'-Question is a valuable tool to facilitate consideration of patient-centred goals and promote holistic care in haemato-oncology. However, prognostic uncertainty, lack of time and communication skills are barriers for integration into daily practice. Further research should involve haematology patients to integrate their needs and preferences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measurement is crucial to assess the benefit of psychotherapeutic interventions. Is repeated assessment of psychometric self-report data possible, as inpatient palliative care patients suffer from physical and psychological symptoms? What is the self-perceived strain caused by the assessment? Objective The main objective of this study was to investigate the feasibility of a repeated comprehensive psychometric self-assessment of inpatient palliative care patients. Secondary objectives were the PROs of the psychometric assessment. Design: We conducted a prospective cohort study. Patients admitted to our palliative care unit (PCU) were reviewed for eligibility within 72 hours. They were asked for weekly self-reports regarding hope (HHI-D), well-being (FACIT-Sp), anxiety and depression (STADI), and quality of life (QoL; EORTC-QLQ-C-30 single item). The strain caused by the assessment was assessed by a numeric rating scale (0-10) and free comments. Results: Within 11 months, 219 patients were admitted to the PCU. In total, 92 patients were eligible. The most frequent exclusion criterion was 'life expectancy <1 week.' A total of 60 patients participated at the first point of measurement. The mean of self-perceived strain (Likert scale 0-10) due to the assessment was 1.44 (SD 1.99) at T1. Twenty-four patients participated twice. Here we found increased scores for physical well-being and QoL. Conclusion: Repeated assessment of psychological conditions is feasible for 27.4% of inpatients at a German PCU. The most limiting factor is life expectancy of only days at admission to the PCU. However, the self-perceived strain is low. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Undergraduate palliative care education (UPCE) became mandatory in Germany by 2013. The training in Mainz, addressing fifth-year (5Y) medical students, emphasizes transfer of knowledge and skills. In this study we assessed students' knowledge and students' self-estimation of self-confidence in palliative care (PC) according to Bandura's concept of self-efficacy. Objective: The study objective was to evaluate the effects of the Mainz UPCE on students' self-confidence regarding important domains in PC. Methods: We conducted a prospective questionnaire-based cohort study with a pre-post design. 5Y medical students ( n=329) were asked for self-estimation concerning knowledge, somatic aspects, spiritual and psychological aspects before and after a 7x90-minute teaching course. To assess knowledge, students completed a multiple choice examination at the end of the term. Results: Overall, 156 students completed matched surveys at both points of measurement. The majority of these students felt more confident after the course than before in all aspects of PC ( p<0.0001). All students passed the exam with average scores greater than 90%. Conclusion: A 7x90-minute interactive tutorial in PC for 5Y medical students is feasible and improves both self-efficacy and knowledge of core PC issues. Whether the effects of the course are long-lasting is the objective for further research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recognized disparities in quality of end-of-life care exist. Our aim was to assess the quality of care for patients dying from cancer, as perceived by bereaved relatives, within hospitals in seven European and South American countries., Materials and Methods: A postbereavement survey was conducted by post, interview, or via tablet in Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, U.K., Germany, Norway, and Poland. Next of kin to cancer patients were asked to complete the international version of the Care Of the Dying Evaluation (i-CODE) questionnaire 6-8 weeks postbereavement. Primary outcomes were (a) how frequently the deceased patient was treated with dignity and respect, and (b) how well the family member was supported in the patient's last days of life., Results: Of 1,683 potential participants, 914 i-CODE questionnaires were completed (response rate, 54%). Approximately 94% reported the doctors treated their family member with dignity and respect "always" or "most of the time"; similar responses were given about nursing staff (94%). Additionally, 89% of participants reported they were adequately supported; this was more likely if the patient died on a specialist palliative care unit (odds ratio, 6.3; 95% confidence interval, 2.3-17.8). Although 87% of participants were told their relative was likely to die, only 63% were informed about what to expect during the dying phase., Conclusion: This is the first study assessing quality of care for dying cancer patients from the bereaved relatives' perspective across several countries on two continents. Our findings suggest many elements of good care were practiced but improvement in communication with relatives of imminently dying patients is needed. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03566732)., Implications for Practice: Previous studies have shown that bereaved relatives' views represent a valid way to assess care for dying patients in the last days of their life. The Care Of the Dying Evaluation questionnaire is a suitable tool for quality improvement work to help determine areas where care is perceived well and areas where care is perceived as lacking. Health care professionals need to sustain high quality communication into the last phase of the cancer trajectory. In particular, discussions about what to expect when someone is dying and the provision of hydration in the last days of life represent key areas for improvement., (© 2021 The Authors. The Oncologist published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of AlphaMed Press.)

Background: The Surprise Question (SQ) "would I be surprised if this patient were to die in the next 12 months?" has been suggested to help clinicians, and especially General Practitioners (GPs), identify people who might benefit from palliative care. The prognostic accuracy of this approach is unclear and little is known about how GPs use this tool in practice. Are GPs consistent, individually and as a group? Are there international differences in the use of the tool? Does including the alternative Surprise Question ("Would I be surprised if the patient were still alive after 12 months?") alter the response? What is the impact on the treatment plan in response to the SQ? This study aims to address these questions., Methods: An online study will be completed by 600 (100 per country) registered GPs. They will be asked to review 20 hypothetical patient vignettes. For each vignette they will be asked to provide a response to the following four questions: (1) the SQ [Yes/No]; (2) the alternative SQ [Yes/No]; (3) the percentage probability of dying [0% no chance - 100% certain death]; and (4) the proposed treatment plan [multiple choice]. A "surprise threshold" for each participant will be calculated by comparing the responses to the SQ with the probability estimates of death. We will use linear regression to explore any differences in thresholds between countries and other clinician-related factors, such as years of experience. We will describe the actions taken by the clinicians and explore the differences between groups. We will also investigate the relationship between the alternative SQ and the other responses. Participants will receive a certificate of completion and the option to receive feedback on their performance., Discussion: This study explores the extent to which the SQ is consistently used at an individual, group, and national level. The findings of this study will help to understand the clinical value of using the SQ in routine practice., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03697213 (05/10/2018). Prospectively registered.