Christopher E Cox1,2, Derek M Jones1,2, Wen Reagan1,2, Mary D Key1,2, Vinca Chow3, Jessica McFarlin4,5, David Casarett6, Claire J Creutzfeldt7, Sharron L Docherty8. 1. 1 Department of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary & Critical Care Medicine, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. 2. 2 Program to Support People and Enhance Recovery, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. 3. 3 Department of Anesthesiology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. 4. 4 Department of Neurology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky. 5. 5 Division of Palliative Care, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky. 6. 6 Palliative Care Medicine Program, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. 7. 7 Department of Neurology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; and. 8. 8 School of Nursing, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina.
Abstract
RATIONALE: The quality and patient-centeredness of intensive care unit (ICU)-based palliative care delivery is highly variable. OBJECTIVE: To develop and pilot an app platform for clinicians and ICU patients and their family members that enhances the delivery of needs-targeted palliative care. METHODS: In the development phase of the study, we developed an electronic health record (EHR) system-integrated mobile web app system prototype, PCplanner (Palliative Care Planner). PCplanner screens the EHR for ICU patients meeting any of five prompts (triggers) for palliative care consultation, allows families to report their unmet palliative care needs, and alerts clinicians to these needs. The evaluation phase included a prospective before/after study conducted at a large academic medical center. Two control populations were enrolled in the before period to serve as context for the intervention. First, 25 ICU patients who received palliative care consults served as patient-level controls. Second, 49 family members of ICU patients who received mechanical ventilation for at least 48 hours served as family-level controls. Afterward, 14 patients, 18 family members, and 10 clinicians participated in the intervention evaluation period. Family member outcomes measured at baseline and 4 days later included acceptability (Client Satisfaction Questionnaire [CSQ]), usability (Systems Usability Scale [SUS]), and palliative care needs, assessed with the adapted needs of social nature, existential concerns, symptoms, and therapeutic interaction (NEST) scale; the Patient-Centeredness of Care Scale (PCCS); and the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS). Patient outcomes included frequency of goal concordant treatment, hospital length of stay, and discharge disposition. RESULTS: Family members reported high PCplanner acceptability (mean CSQ, 14.1 [SD, 1.4]) and usability (mean SUS, 21.1 [SD, 1.7]). PCplanner family member recipients experienced a 12.7-unit reduction in NEST score compared with a 3.4-unit increase among controls (P = 0.002), as well as improved mean scores on the PCCS (6.6 [SD, 5.8]) and the PSS (-0.8 [SD, 1.9]). The frequency of goal-concordant treatment increased over the course of the intervention (n = 14 [SD, 79%] vs. n = 18 [SD, 100%]). Compared with palliative care controls, intervention patients received palliative care consultation sooner (3.9 [SD, 2.7] vs. 6.9 [SD, 7.1] mean days), had a shorter mean hospital length of stay (20.5 [SD, 9.1] vs. 22.3 [SD, 16.0] patient number), and received hospice care more frequently (5 [36%] vs. 5 [20%]), although these differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: PCplanner represents an acceptable, usable, and clinically promising systems-based approach to delivering EHR-triggered, needs-targeted ICU-based palliative care within a standard clinical workflow. A clinical trial in a larger population is needed to evaluate its efficacy.
RATIONALE: The quality and patient-centeredness of intensive care unit (ICU)-based palliative care delivery is highly variable. OBJECTIVE: To develop and pilot an app platform for clinicians and ICU patients and their family members that enhances the delivery of needs-targeted palliative care. METHODS: In the development phase of the study, we developed an electronic health record (EHR) system-integrated mobile web app system prototype, PCplanner (Palliative Care Planner). PCplanner screens the EHR for ICU patients meeting any of five prompts (triggers) for palliative care consultation, allows families to report their unmet palliative care needs, and alerts clinicians to these needs. The evaluation phase included a prospective before/after study conducted at a large academic medical center. Two control populations were enrolled in the before period to serve as context for the intervention. First, 25 ICU patients who received palliative care consults served as patient-level controls. Second, 49 family members of ICU patients who received mechanical ventilation for at least 48 hours served as family-level controls. Afterward, 14 patients, 18 family members, and 10 clinicians participated in the intervention evaluation period. Family member outcomes measured at baseline and 4 days later included acceptability (Client Satisfaction Questionnaire [CSQ]), usability (Systems Usability Scale [SUS]), and palliative care needs, assessed with the adapted needs of social nature, existential concerns, symptoms, and therapeutic interaction (NEST) scale; the Patient-Centeredness of Care Scale (PCCS); and the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS). Patient outcomes included frequency of goal concordant treatment, hospital length of stay, and discharge disposition. RESULTS: Family members reported high PCplanner acceptability (mean CSQ, 14.1 [SD, 1.4]) and usability (mean SUS, 21.1 [SD, 1.7]). PCplanner family member recipients experienced a 12.7-unit reduction in NEST score compared with a 3.4-unit increase among controls (P = 0.002), as well as improved mean scores on the PCCS (6.6 [SD, 5.8]) and the PSS (-0.8 [SD, 1.9]). The frequency of goal-concordant treatment increased over the course of the intervention (n = 14 [SD, 79%] vs. n = 18 [SD, 100%]). Compared with palliative care controls, intervention patients received palliative care consultation sooner (3.9 [SD, 2.7] vs. 6.9 [SD, 7.1] mean days), had a shorter mean hospital length of stay (20.5 [SD, 9.1] vs. 22.3 [SD, 16.0] patient number), and received hospice care more frequently (5 [36%] vs. 5 [20%]), although these differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: PCplanner represents an acceptable, usable, and clinically promising systems-based approach to delivering EHR-triggered, needs-targeted ICU-based palliative care within a standard clinical workflow. A clinical trial in a larger population is needed to evaluate its efficacy.
Authors: Judith E Nelson; Therese B Cortez; J Randall Curtis; Dana R Lustbader; Anne C Mosenthal; Colleen Mulkerin; Daniel E Ray; Rick Bassett; Renee D Boss; Karen J Brasel; Margaret L Campbell; David E Weissman; Kathleen A Puntillo Journal: J Hosp Palliat Nurs Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 1.918
Authors: Christopher E Cox; Tereza Martinu; Shailaja J Sathy; Alison S Clay; Jessica Chia; Alice L Gray; Maren K Olsen; Joseph A Govert; Shannon S Carson; James A Tulsky Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: John J You; James Downar; Robert A Fowler; François Lamontagne; Irene W Y Ma; Dev Jayaraman; Jennifer Kryworuchko; Patricia H Strachan; Roy Ilan; Aman P Nijjar; John Neary; John Shik; Kevin Brazil; Amen Patel; Kim Wiebe; Martin Albert; Anita Palepu; Elysée Nouvet; Amanda Roze des Ordons; Nishan Sharma; Amane Abdul-Razzak; Xuran Jiang; Andrew Day; Daren K Heyland Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: William J Ehlenbach; Amber E Barnato; J Randall Curtis; William Kreuter; Thomas D Koepsell; Richard A Deyo; Renee D Stapleton Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-07-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Nicholas G Wysham; May Hua; Catherine L Hough; Stephanie Gundel; Sharron L Docherty; Derek M Jones; Owen Reagan; Haley Goucher; Jessica Mcfarlin; Christopher E Cox Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2017-04 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Karen G Scandrett; Eva B Reitschuler-Cross; Lauren Nelson; J Alex Sanger; Maia Feigon; Elizabeth Boyd; Chih-Hung Chang; Judith A Paice; Joshua M Hauser; Alexey Chamkin; Paul Balfour; Alexei Stolbunov; Charles L Bennett; Linda L Emanuel Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Rosalie G Waller; Melanie C Wright; Noa Segall; Paige Nesbitt; Thomas Reese; Damian Borbolla; Guilherme Del Fiol Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2019-05-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Christopher E Cox; Isaretta L Riley; Deepshikha C Ashana; Krista Haines; Maren K Olsen; Jessie Gu; Elias H Pratt; Mashael Al-Hegelan; Robert W Harrison; Colleen Naglee; Allie Frear; Hongqiu Yang; Kimberly S Johnson; Sharron L Docherty Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2021-02-13 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Christopher E Cox; Maren K Olsen; David Casarett; Krista Haines; Mashael Al-Hegelan; Raquel R Bartz; Jason N Katz; Colleen Naglee; Deepshikha Ashana; Daniel Gilstrap; Jessie Gu; Alice Parish; Allie Frear; Deepthi Krishnamaneni; Andrew Corcoran; Sharron L Docherty Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2020-09-29 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Jennifer Dickman Portz; Kelsey Ford; David B Bekelman; Rebecca S Boxer; Jean S Kutner; Sara Czaja; Kira Elsbernd; Sheana Bull Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2019-09-17 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Lorraine R Buis; Dana N Roberson; Reema Kadri; Nicole G Rockey; Melissa A Plegue; Shivang U Danak; Timothy C Guetterman; Melanie G Johnson; Hae Mi Choe; Caroline R Richardson Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2020-08-11 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Christopher E Cox; Deepshikha Charan Ashana; Krista L Haines; David Casarett; Maren K Olsen; Alice Parish; Yasmin Ali O'Keefe; Mashael Al-Hegelan; Robert W Harrison; Colleen Naglee; Jason N Katz; Allie Frear; Elias H Pratt; Jessie Gu; Isaretta L Riley; Shirley Otis-Green; Kimberly S Johnson; Sharron L Docherty Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2022-01-04