Knowledge, attitudes, and preferences of healthy young adults regarding advance care planning: A focus group study of university students in Pittsburgh, USA Health behavior, health promotion and society

Background: To date, research and promotion regarding advance care planning (ACP) has targeted those with serious illness or the elderly, thereby ignoring healthy young adults. The purpose of this study was to explore young adults' knowledge, attitudes, and preferences regarding advance care planning (ACP) and medical decision-making. Further, we aimed to understand the potential role of public health to encourage population-based promotion of ACP. Methods: Between February 2007 and April 2007, we conducted six focus groups comprising 56 young adults ages 18-30. Topics explored included (1) baseline knowledge regarding ACP, (2) preferences for ACP, (3) characteristics of preferred surrogates, and (4) barriers and facilitators to completing ACP specific to age and individuation. We used a qualitative thematic approach to analyze transcripts. Results: All participants desired more information regarding ACP. In addition, participants expressed (1) heterogeneous attitudes regarding triggers to perform ACP, (2) the opinion that ACP is a marker of individuation, (3) the belief that prior exposure to illness plays a role in prompting ACP, and (4) an appreciation that ACP is flexible to changes in preferences and circumstances throughout the life-course. Conclusion: Young adults perceive ACP as a worthwhile health behavior and view a lack of information as a major barrier to discussion and adoption. Our data emphasize the need for strategies to increase ACP knowledge, while encouraging population-level, patient-centered, healthcare decision-making

Access to palliative care for patients with advanced cancer: A longitudinal population analysis

Background The UK National Health Service is striving to improve access to palliative care for patients with advanced cancer however limited information exists on the level of palliative care support currently provided in the UK. We aimed to establish the duration and intensity of palliative care received by patients with advanced cancer and identify which cancer patients are missing out. Methods Retrospective cancer registry, primary care and secondary care data were obtained and linked for 2474 patients who died of cancer between 2010 and 2012 within a large metropolitan UK city. Associations between the type, duration, and amount of palliative care by demographic characteristics, cancer type, and therapies received were assessed using Chi-squared, Mann-Whitney or Kruskal-Wallis tests. Multinomial multivariate logistic regression was used to assess the odds of receiving community and/or hospital palliative care compared to no palliative care by demographic characteristics, cancer type, and therapies received. Results Overall 64.6% of patients received palliative care. The average palliative care input was two contacts over six weeks. Community palliative care was associated with more palliative care events (p<0.001) for a longer duration (p<0.001). Patients were less likely to receive palliative care if they were: male (p = 0.002), aged 80 years or over (p<0.05), diagnosed with lung cancer (p<0.05), had not received an opioid prescription (p<0.001), or had not received chemotherapy (p<0.001). Patients given radiotherapy were more likely to receive community only palliative care compared to no palliative care (Odds Ratio = 1.49, 95% Confidence Interval = 1.16–1.90). Conclusion Timely supportive care for cancer patients is advocated but these results suggest that older patients and those who do not receive anti-cancer treatment or opioid analgesics miss out. These patients should be targeted for assessment to identify unmet needs which could benefit from palliative care input

Geriatric palliative care: a view of its concept, challenges and strategies.

In aging societies, the last phase of people's lives changes profoundly, challenging traditional care provision in geriatric medicine and palliative care. Both specialties have to collaborate closely and geriatric palliative care (GPC) should be conceptualized as an interdisciplinary field of care and research based on the synergies of the two and an ethics of care.Major challenges characterizing the emerging field of GPC concern (1) the development of methodologically creative and ethically sound research to promote evidence-based care and teaching; (2) the promotion of responsible care and treatment decision making in the face of multiple complicating factors related to decisional capacity, communication and behavioural problems, extended disease trajectories and complex social contexts; (3) the implementation of coordinated, continuous care despite the increasing fragmentation, sectorization and specialization in health care.Exemplary strategies to address these challenges are presented: (1) GPC research could be enhanced by specific funding programs, specific patient registries and anticipatory consent procedures; (2) treatment decision making can be significantly improved using advance care planning programs that include adequate decision aids, including those that address proxies of patient who have lost decisional capacity; (3) care coordination and continuity require multiple approaches, such as care transition programs, electronic solutions, and professionals who act as key integrators

Goodbye Hartmann trial: a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study on the current use of a surgical procedure developed a century ago

Background: Literature suggests colonic resection and primary anastomosis (RPA) instead of Hartmann's procedure (HP) for the treatment of left-sided colonic emergencies. We aim to evaluate the surgical options globally used to treat patients with acute left-sided colonic emergencies and the factors that leading to the choice of treatment, comparing HP and RPA. Methods: This is a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. A total 1215 patients with left-sided colonic emergencies who required surgery were included from 204 centers during the period of March 1, 2020, to May 31, 2020. with a 1-year follow-up. Results: 564 patients (43.1%) were females. The mean age was 65.9 ± 15.6&nbsp;years. HP was performed in 697 (57.3%) patients and RPA in 384 (31.6%) cases. Complicated acute diverticulitis was the most common cause of left-sided colonic emergencies (40.2%), followed by colorectal malignancy (36.6%). Severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3b) were higher in the HP group (P &lt; 0.001). 30-day mortality was higher in HP patients (13.7%), especially in case of bowel perforation and diffused peritonitis. 1-year follow-up showed no differences on ostomy reversal rate between HP and RPA. (P = 0.127). A backward likelihood logistic regression model showed that RPA was preferred in younger patients, having low ASA score (≤ 3), in case of large bowel obstruction, absence of colonic ischemia, longer time from admission to surgery, operating early at the day working hours, by a surgeon who performed more than 50 colorectal resections. Conclusions: After 100&nbsp;years since the first Hartmann's procedure, HP remains the most common treatment for left-sided colorectal emergencies. Treatment's choice depends on patient characteristics, the time of surgery and the experience of the surgeon. RPA should be considered as the gold standard for surgery, with HP being an exception

Comparing Unmet Needs between Community-Based Palliative Care Patients with Heart Failure and Patients with Cancer

Background: As the role of palliative care (PC) has yet to be clearly defined in patients with heart failure (HF), such patients may face barriers regarding PC referral. In order to maximally meet the needs of HF patients, it is necessary to understand how they compare to the classic PC population: patients with cancer. Objective: To characterize the unresolved symptom and treatment needs with which patients with HF and those with cancer present to PC. Methods: We used data from the Palliative Care Research Registry (PCRR), a repository of quality improvement data from three community-based PC organizations. We abstracted first PC visit data from the PCRR for patients with primary diagnoses of HF or cancer seen between 2008 and 2012. We assessed the association of primary diagnosis (i.e., HF or cancer) on three outcomes: unresolved symptoms, treatment gaps, and a composite indicator of symptom control and quality of life. Analyses included descriptive statistics and multivariate Poisson regression. Results: Our analytic sample comprised 334 patients with HF and 697 patients with cancer, the majority of whom were white and male. Compared to patients with cancer, patients with HF presented with fewer unresolved symptoms, both overall and at moderate/severe distress levels. Patients with HF more commonly reported moderately/severely distressful dyspnea (25% versus 18%, p=0.02), and more commonly experienced dyspnea-related treatment gaps (17% versus 8%, p<0.001). Conclusions: Patients with HF possess care needs that are squarely within the purview of PC. Future work is needed to delineate how PC referral policies should be refined to optimize PC access for patients with HF