Charlotte Wool1, Denise Côté-Arsenault2, Beth Perry Black3, Erin Denney-Koelsch4, Sujeong Kim5, Karen Kavanaugh6. 1. 1 York College of Pennsylvania , York, Pennsylvania. 2. 2 University of North Carolina Greensboro School of Nursing , Greensboro, North Carolina. 3. 3 UNC at Chapel Hill, School of Nursing , Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 4. 4 University of Rochester , Division of Palliative Care, Rochester, New York. 5. 5 University of Illinois at Chicago College of Nursing , Chicago, Illinois. 6. 6 Wayne State University College of Nursing , the Children's Hospital of Michigan Family, Community, and Mental Health, Detroit, Michigan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Congenital anomalies account for 20% of neonatal and infant deaths in the United States. Perinatal palliative care is a recent addition to palliative care and is meant to meet the needs of families who choose to continue a pregnancy affected by a life-limiting diagnosis. OBJECTIVE: To examine characteristics of programs and services provided, assess alignment with the National Consensus Project domains of care, and identify providers and disciplines involved in programs. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey design included 48 items addressing funding and domains of quality care. SUBJECTS: Program representatives from 30 states (n = 75). PRINCIPAL RESULTS: Perinatal palliative care programs are housed in academic medical centers, regional or community hospitals, local hospices, or community-based organizations. Significant differences by program setting were observed for type of fetal diagnoses seen, formal training in communicating bad news to parents, mechanisms to ensure continuity of care, and reimbursement mechanisms. One hundred percent of programs provided attention to spiritual needs and bereavement services; 70% of programs are less than 10 years old. Follow-up with parents to assess whether goals were met occurs at 43% of the perinatal palliative care programs. Formal measures of quality assessment were articulated in 38% of programs. CONCLUSION: This study dramatically adds to the literature available on perinatal palliative care program settings, types, and domains of care. It is clear that there are a variety of types of programs and that the field is still developing. More work is needed to determine which quality measures are needed to address perinatal care needs in this population.
BACKGROUND:Congenital anomalies account for 20% of neonatal and infant deaths in the United States. Perinatal palliative care is a recent addition to palliative care and is meant to meet the needs of families who choose to continue a pregnancy affected by a life-limiting diagnosis. OBJECTIVE: To examine characteristics of programs and services provided, assess alignment with the National Consensus Project domains of care, and identify providers and disciplines involved in programs. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey design included 48 items addressing funding and domains of quality care. SUBJECTS: Program representatives from 30 states (n = 75). PRINCIPAL RESULTS: Perinatal palliative care programs are housed in academic medical centers, regional or community hospitals, local hospices, or community-based organizations. Significant differences by program setting were observed for type of fetal diagnoses seen, formal training in communicating bad news to parents, mechanisms to ensure continuity of care, and reimbursement mechanisms. One hundred percent of programs provided attention to spiritual needs and bereavement services; 70% of programs are less than 10 years old. Follow-up with parents to assess whether goals were met occurs at 43% of the perinatal palliative care programs. Formal measures of quality assessment were articulated in 38% of programs. CONCLUSION: This study dramatically adds to the literature available on perinatal palliative care program settings, types, and domains of care. It is clear that there are a variety of types of programs and that the field is still developing. More work is needed to determine which quality measures are needed to address perinatal care needs in this population.
Authors: Kimberley Widger; Dawn Davies; Adam Rapoport; Christina Vadeboncoeur; Stephen Liben; Amrita Sarpal; Simone Stenekes; Claude Cyr; Lysanne Daoust; Marie-Claude Grégoire; Marli Robertson; Heather Hodgson-Viden; Julie Laflamme; Harold Siden Journal: CMAJ Open Date: 2016-10-11
Authors: Sarah Lord; Rebecca Williams; Lindsay Pollard; Lori Ives-Baine; Carolyn Wilson; Kira Goodman; Adam Rapoport Journal: J Palliat Care Date: 2022-06-03 Impact factor: 1.980
Authors: Karin Zimmermann; Eva Cignacco; Sandra Engberg; Anne-Sylvie Ramelet; Nicolas von der Weid; Katri Eskola; Eva Bergstraesser; Marc Ansari; Christoph Aebi; Reta Baer; Maja Beck Popovic; Vera Bernet; Pierluigi Brazzola; Hans Ulrich Bucher; Regula Buder; Sandra Cagnazzo; Barbara Dinten; Anouk Dorsaz; Franz Elmer; Raquel Enriquez; Patricia Fahrni-Nater; Gabi Finkbeiner; Bernhard Frey; Urs Frey; Jeannette Greiner; Ralph-Ingo Hassink; Simone Keller; Oliver Kretschmar; Judith Kroell; Bernard Laubscher; Kurt Leibundgut; Reta Malaer; Andreas Meyer; Christoph Stuessi; Mathias Nelle; Thomas Neuhaus; Felix Niggli; Geneviève Perrenoud; Jean-Pierre Pfammatter; Barbara Plecko; Debora Rupf; Felix Sennhauser; Caroline Stade; Maja Steinlin; Lilian Stoffel; Karin Thomas; Christian Vonarburg; Rodo von Vigier; Bendicht Wagner; Judith Wieland; Birgit Wernz Journal: BMC Pediatr Date: 2018-02-16 Impact factor: 2.125
Authors: Alexandra K Superdock; Raymond C Barfield; Debra H Brandon; Sharron L Docherty Journal: BMC Palliat Care Date: 2018-09-12 Impact factor: 3.234