Katherine C Lee1, Anne M Walling2, Steven S Senglaub3, Amy S Kelley4, Zara Cooper5. 1. The Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA; Department of Surgery, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA. Electronic address: kclee@bwh.harvard.edu. 2. Division of General Internal Medicine and Health Services Research, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA; Greater Los Angeles Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA; Affiliated Adjunct Staff, RAND Health, Los Angeles, California, USA. 3. The Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 4. Department of Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, USA. 5. The Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA; Hebrew SeniorLife Marcus Institute for Aging Research, Boston, Massachusetts, USA; Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Palliative care (PC) for seriously ill surgical patients, including aligning treatments with patients' goals and managing symptoms, is associated with improved patient-oriented outcomes and decreased health care utilization. However, efforts to integrate PC alongside restorative surgical care are limited by the lack of a consensus definition for serious illness in the perioperative context. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to develop a serious illness definition for surgical patients and identify a denominator for quality measurement efforts. METHODS: We developed a preliminary definition including a set of criteria for 11 conditions and health states. Using the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method, a 12-member expert advisory panel rated the criteria for each condition and health state twice, once after an in-person moderated discussion, for validity (primary outcome) and feasibility of measurement. RESULTS: All panelists completed both rounds of rating. All 11 conditions and health states defining serious illness for surgical patients were rated as valid. During the in-person discussion, panelists refined and narrowed criteria for two conditions (vulnerable elder, heart failure). The final definition included the following 11 conditions and health states: vulnerable elder, heart failure, advanced cancer, oxygen-dependent pulmonary disease, cirrhosis, end-stage renal disease, dementia, critical trauma, frailty, nursing home residency, and American Society of Anesthesiology Risk Score IV-V. CONCLUSION: We identified a consensus definition for serious illness in surgery. Opportunities remain in measuring the prevalence, identifying health trajectories, and developing screening criteria to integrate PC with restorative surgical care.
CONTEXT: Palliative care (PC) for seriously ill surgical patients, including aligning treatments with patients' goals and managing symptoms, is associated with improved patient-oriented outcomes and decreased health care utilization. However, efforts to integrate PC alongside restorative surgical care are limited by the lack of a consensus definition for serious illness in the perioperative context. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to develop a serious illness definition for surgical patients and identify a denominator for quality measurement efforts. METHODS: We developed a preliminary definition including a set of criteria for 11 conditions and health states. Using the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method, a 12-member expert advisory panel rated the criteria for each condition and health state twice, once after an in-person moderated discussion, for validity (primary outcome) and feasibility of measurement. RESULTS: All panelists completed both rounds of rating. All 11 conditions and health states defining serious illness for surgical patients were rated as valid. During the in-person discussion, panelists refined and narrowed criteria for two conditions (vulnerable elder, heart failure). The final definition included the following 11 conditions and health states: vulnerable elder, heart failure, advanced cancer, oxygen-dependent pulmonary disease, cirrhosis, end-stage renal disease, dementia, critical trauma, frailty, nursing home residency, and American Society of Anesthesiology Risk Score IV-V. CONCLUSION: We identified a consensus definition for serious illness in surgery. Opportunities remain in measuring the prevalence, identifying health trajectories, and developing screening criteria to integrate PC with restorative surgical care.
Authors: Julia R Berian; Ronnie A Rosenthal; Tracey L Baker; JoAnn Coleman; Emily Finlayson; Mark R Katlic; Sandhya A Lagoo-Deenadayalan; Victoria L Tang; Thomas N Robinson; Clifford Y Ko; Marcia M Russell Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2018-02 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Amy S Kelley; Kenneth E Covinsky; Rebecca J Gorges; Karen McKendrick; Evan Bollens-Lund; R Sean Morrison; Christine S Ritchie Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2016-03-18 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Heena P Santry; Charles M Psoinos; Christopher J Wilbert; Julie M Flahive; Aimee R Kroll-Desrosiers; Timothy A Emhoff; Catarina I Kiefe Journal: J Crit Care Date: 2015-01-08 Impact factor: 3.425
Authors: James Forrest Calland; Angela M Ingraham; Niels Martin; Gary T Marshall; Carl I Schulman; Tristan Stapleton; Robert D Barraco Journal: J Trauma Acute Care Surg Date: 2012-11 Impact factor: 3.313
Authors: Joel S Weissman; Amanda J Reich; Holly G Prigerson; Priscilla Gazarian; Jennifer Tjia; Dae Kim; Phil Rodgers; Adoma Manful Journal: JAMA Health Forum Date: 2021-07-30