CONTEXT: There are few multicenter studies that examine the impact of systematic screening for palliative care and specialty consultation in the intensive care unit (ICU). OBJECTIVE: To determine the outcomes of receiving palliative care consultation (PCC) for patients who screened positive on palliative care referral criteria. METHODS: In a prospective quality assurance intervention with a retrospective analysis, the covariate balancing propensity score method was used to estimate the conditional probability of receiving a PCC and to balance important covariates. For patients with and without PCCs, outcomes studied were as follows: 1) change to "do not resuscitate" (DNR), 2) discharge to hospice, 3) 30-day readmission, 4) hospital length of stay (LOS), 5) total direct hospital costs. RESULTS: In 405 patients with positive screens, 161 (40%) who received a PCC were compared to 244 who did not. Patients receiving PCCs had higher rates of DNR-adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 7.5; 95% CI 5.6-9.9) and hospice referrals-(AOR = 7.6; 95% CI 5.0-11.7). They had slightly lower 30-day readmissions-(AOR = 0.7; 95% CI 0.5-1.0); no overall difference in direct costs or LOS was found between the two groups. When patients receiving PCCs were stratified by time to PCC initiation, early consultation-by Day 4 of admission-was associated with reductions in LOS (1.7 days [95% CI -3.1, -1.2]) and average direct variable costs (-$1815 [95% CI -$3322, -$803]) compared to those who received no PCC. CONCLUSION: Receiving a PCC in the ICUs was significantly associated with more frequent DNR code status and hospice referrals, but not 30-day readmissions or hospital utilization. Early PCC was associated with significant LOS and direct cost reductions. Providing PCC early in the ICU should be considered.
CONTEXT: There are few multicenter studies that examine the impact of systematic screening for palliative care and specialty consultation in the intensive care unit (ICU). OBJECTIVE: To determine the outcomes of receiving palliative care consultation (PCC) for patients who screened positive on palliative care referral criteria. METHODS: In a prospective quality assurance intervention with a retrospective analysis, the covariate balancing propensity score method was used to estimate the conditional probability of receiving a PCC and to balance important covariates. For patients with and without PCCs, outcomes studied were as follows: 1) change to "do not resuscitate" (DNR), 2) discharge to hospice, 3) 30-day readmission, 4) hospital length of stay (LOS), 5) total direct hospital costs. RESULTS: In 405 patients with positive screens, 161 (40%) who received a PCC were compared to 244 who did not. Patients receiving PCCs had higher rates of DNR-adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 7.5; 95% CI 5.6-9.9) and hospice referrals-(AOR = 7.6; 95% CI 5.0-11.7). They had slightly lower 30-day readmissions-(AOR = 0.7; 95% CI 0.5-1.0); no overall difference in direct costs or LOS was found between the two groups. When patients receiving PCCs were stratified by time to PCC initiation, early consultation-by Day 4 of admission-was associated with reductions in LOS (1.7 days [95% CI -3.1, -1.2]) and average direct variable costs (-$1815 [95% CI -$3322, -$803]) compared to those who received no PCC. CONCLUSION: Receiving a PCC in the ICUs was significantly associated with more frequent DNR code status and hospice referrals, but not 30-day readmissions or hospital utilization. Early PCC was associated with significant LOS and direct cost reductions. Providing PCC early in the ICU should be considered.
Keywords:
Palliative care consultation; consult trigger tool; direct variable costs; do not resuscitate code change; intensive care unit; length of stay
Authors: Laura C Hanson; Frances Collichio; Stephen A Bernard; William A Wood; Matt Milowsky; Erin Burgess; Crista J Creedle; Summer Cheek; Lydia Chang; Bhisham Chera; Alexandra Fox; Feng-Chang Lin Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2017-07-24 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Jessica Ma; Stephen Chi; Benjamin Buettner; Katherine Pollard; Monica Muir; Charu Kolekar; Noor Al-Hammadi; Ling Chen; Marin Kollef; Maria Dans Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2019-12 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Sarah K Andersen; Grace Vincent; Rachel A Butler; Elke H P Brown; Dave Maloney; Sana Khalid; Rae Oanesa; James Yun; Carrie Pidro; Valerie N Davis; Judith Resick; Aaron Richardson; Kimberly Rak; Jackie Barnes; Karl B Bezak; Andrew Thurston; Eva Reitschuler-Cross; Linda A King; Ian Barbash; Ali Al-Khafaji; Emily Brant; Jonathan Bishop; Jennifer McComb; Chung-Chou H Chang; Jennifer Seaman; Jennifer S Temel; Derek C Angus; Robert Arnold; Yael Schenker; Douglas B White Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2022-06 Impact factor: 5.576
Authors: Navpreet K Dhillon; Ara Ko; Eric J T Smith; Mayumi Kharabi; Joseph Castongia; Michael Nurok; Bruce L Gewertz; Eric J Ley Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2017-11-01 Impact factor: 14.766