Literature DB >> 15992191

Is the palliative performance scale a useful predictor of mortality in a heterogeneous hospice population?

Joan Harrold1, Elizabeth Rickerson, Janet T Carroll, Jennifer McGrath, Knashawn Morales, Jennifer Kapo, David Casarett.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Hospices provide care to patients with a wide range of prognoses, and must develop care plans that anticipate each patient's likely illness trajectory. However, the tools available to guide prognostication and care planning in this population have limited data to support their use. For instance, one of the most widely-used prognostic tools, the Palliative Performance Scale (PPS), has been studied primarily in inpatient settings and in patients with cancer. Its prognostic value in a heterogeneous US hospice population is unknown.
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of the PPS as a predictor of mortality in a heterogeneous hospice population, and to determine whether it performs equally well across diagnoses and sites of care.
DESIGN: Prospective cohort study using existing medical records. SETTING/
SUBJECTS: This study was conducted at a large community hospice program, and included all patients enrolled in hospice during the study period. MEASUREMENTS: Each patient's PPS score was recorded at the time of enrollment and patients were followed until death or discharge from hospice.
RESULTS: A total of 466 patients enrolled in hospice during the study period. The PPS score was a strong independent predictor of mortality (log rank test of Kaplan Meier survival curves p < 0.001). Six-month mortality rates for 3 PPS categories were 96% (for PPS scores 10-20), 89% (for PPS scores 30-40), and 81% (for PPS scores > or =50). Evaluation of interaction terms in Cox proportional hazards models demonstrated a stronger association between PPS score and mortality among nursing home residents and patients with non-cancer diagnoses. Analysis of the area under receiver operating characteristic curves demonstrated strong predictive value overall, with somewhat greater accuracy for nursing home residents and patients with noncancer diagnoses.
CONCLUSION: The PPS performs well as a predictor of prognosis in a heterogeneous hospice population, and performs particularly well for nursing home residents and for patients with non-cancer diagnoses. The PPS should be useful in confirming hospice eligibility for reimbursement purposes and in guiding plans for hospice care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15992191     DOI: 10.1089/jpm.2005.8.503

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Palliat Med        ISSN: 1557-7740            Impact factor:   2.947


  31 in total

1.  Prospective comparison of prognostic scores in palliative care cancer populations.

Authors:  Marco Maltoni; Emanuela Scarpi; Cristina Pittureri; Francesca Martini; Luigi Montanari; Elena Amaducci; Stefania Derni; Laura Fabbri; Marta Rosati; Dino Amadori; Oriana Nanni
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2012-02-29

2.  The art versus science of predicting prognosis: can a prognostic index predict short-term mortality better than experienced nurses do?

Authors:  David J Casarett; Sue Farrington; Teresa Craig; Julie Slattery; Joan Harrold; Betty Oldanie; Jason Roy; Richard Biehl; Joan Teno
Journal:  J Palliat Med       Date:  2012-05-14       Impact factor: 2.947

3.  Survival after dialysis discontinuation and hospice enrollment for ESRD.

Authors:  Nina R O'Connor; Meredith Dougherty; Pamela S Harris; David J Casarett
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2013-11-07       Impact factor: 8.237

4.  Guiding principles for the care of older adults with multimorbidity: an approach for clinicians: American Geriatrics Society Expert Panel on the Care of Older Adults with Multimorbidity.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2012-09-19       Impact factor: 5.562

5.  Which hospice patients with cancer are able to die in the setting of their choice? Results of a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Neha Jeurkar; Sue Farrington; Teresa R Craig; Julie Slattery; Joan K Harrold; Betty Oldanie; Joan M Teno; David J Casarett
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-06-25       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Functional trajectories in the year before hospice.

Authors:  Hans F Stabenau; Laura J Morrison; Evelyne A Gahbauer; Linda Leo-Summers; Heather G Allore; Thomas M Gill
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2015 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 5.166

7.  Enhancing provider knowledge and patient screening for palliative care needs in chronic multimorbid patients receiving home-based primary care.

Authors:  Tracy Wharton; Erika Manu; Caroline A Vitale
Journal:  Am J Hosp Palliat Care       Date:  2013-11-25       Impact factor: 2.500

8.  Predicting survival with the Palliative Performance Scale in a minority-serving hospice and palliative care program.

Authors:  Li-Chueh Weng; Hsiu-Li Huang; Diana J Wilkie; Noreen A Hoenig; Marie L Suarez; Michael Marschke; Jan Durham
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2008-09-26       Impact factor: 3.612

9.  Hospice Family Caregiver Involvement in Care Plan Meetings: A Mixed-Methods Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Debra Parker Oliver; George Demiris; Karla Washington; Robin L Kruse; Greg Petroski
Journal:  Am J Hosp Palliat Care       Date:  2016-07-27       Impact factor: 2.500

10.  Nurse and physician inter-rater agreement of three performance status measures in palliative care outpatients.

Authors:  Camilla Zimmermann; Debika Burman; Shazeen Bandukwala; Dori Seccareccia; Ebru Kaya; John Bryson; Gary Rodin; Christopher Lo
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2009-07-23       Impact factor: 3.603

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.