Victoria Metaxa1, Despina Anagnostou2, Savvas Vlachos3, Nishkantha Arulkumaran4, Sherihane Bensemmane5, Ingeborg van Dusseldorp6, Rebecca A Aslakson7,8, Judy E Davidson9, Rik T Gerritsen10, Christiane Hartog11, J Randall Curtis12. 1. King's College Hospital, London, SE5 9RS, UK. victoria.metaxa@nhs.net. 2. School of Medicine, Human Health Sciences, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan. 3. King's College Hospital, London, SE5 9RS, UK. 4. Bloomsbury Institute of Intensive Care Medicine, University College London, London, UK. 5. Health Services Research, Epidemiology and Public Health, Sciensano, Brussels, Belgium. 6. van Dusseldorp, Delvaux en Ket, Groningen, The Netherlands. 7. Division of Primary Care and Population Health, Department of Medicine, Palliative Care Section, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA. 8. Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative, and Pain Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA. 9. Department of Nursing, University of California, San Diego Health Sciences, San Diego, USA. 10. Centrum voor Intensive Care, Medisch Centrum Leeuwarden, PO Box 888, 8901 BR, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands. 11. Klinik Bavaria Kreischa, Kreischa, Germany. 12. Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Cambia Palliative Care Center of Excellence at UW Medicine, University of Washington, 325 Ninth Avenue, Box 359762, Seattle, WA, 98104, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The integration of palliative care into intensive care units (ICUs) is advocated to mitigate physical and psychological burdens for patients and their families, and to improve end-of-life care. The most efficacious palliative care interventions, the optimal model of their delivery and the most appropriate outcome measures in ICU are not clear. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of randomised clinical trials and observational studies to evaluate the number and types of palliative care interventions implemented within the ICU setting, to assess their impact on ICU practice and to evaluate differences in palliative care approaches across different countries. RESULTS: Fifty-eight full articles were identified, including 9 randomised trials and 49 cohort studies; all but 4 were conducted within North America. Interventions were categorised into five themes: communication (14, 24.6%), ethics consultations (5, 8.8%), educational (18, 31.6%), involvement of a palliative care team (28, 49.1%) and advance care planning or goals-of-care discussions (7, 12.3%). Thirty studies (51.7%) proposed an integrative model, whilst 28 (48.3%) reported a consultative one. The most frequently reported outcomes were ICU or hospital length of stay (33/55, 60%), limitation of life-sustaining treatment decisions (22/55, 40%) and mortality (15/55, 27.2%). Quantitative assessment of pooled data was not performed due to heterogeneity in interventions and outcomes between studies. CONCLUSION: Beneficial effects on the most common outcomes were associated with strategies to enhance palliative care involvement, either with an integrative or a consultative approach. Few studies reported functional outcomes for ICU patients. Almost all studies were from North America, limiting the generalisability to other healthcare systems.
PURPOSE: The integration of palliative care into intensive care units (ICUs) is advocated to mitigate physical and psychological burdens for patients and their families, and to improve end-of-life care. The most efficacious palliative care interventions, the optimal model of their delivery and the most appropriate outcome measures in ICU are not clear. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of randomised clinical trials and observational studies to evaluate the number and types of palliative care interventions implemented within the ICU setting, to assess their impact on ICU practice and to evaluate differences in palliative care approaches across different countries. RESULTS: Fifty-eight full articles were identified, including 9 randomised trials and 49 cohort studies; all but 4 were conducted within North America. Interventions were categorised into five themes: communication (14, 24.6%), ethics consultations (5, 8.8%), educational (18, 31.6%), involvement of a palliative care team (28, 49.1%) and advance care planning or goals-of-care discussions (7, 12.3%). Thirty studies (51.7%) proposed an integrative model, whilst 28 (48.3%) reported a consultative one. The most frequently reported outcomes were ICU or hospital length of stay (33/55, 60%), limitation of life-sustaining treatment decisions (22/55, 40%) and mortality (15/55, 27.2%). Quantitative assessment of pooled data was not performed due to heterogeneity in interventions and outcomes between studies. CONCLUSION: Beneficial effects on the most common outcomes were associated with strategies to enhance palliative care involvement, either with an integrative or a consultative approach. Few studies reported functional outcomes for ICU patients. Almost all studies were from North America, limiting the generalisability to other healthcare systems.
Authors: Dio Kavalieratos; Jennifer Corbelli; Di Zhang; J Nicholas Dionne-Odom; Natalie C Ernecoff; Janel Hanmer; Zachariah P Hoydich; Dara Z Ikejiani; Michele Klein-Fedyshin; Camilla Zimmermann; Sally C Morton; Robert M Arnold; Lucas Heller; Yael Schenker Journal: JAMA Date: 2016-11-22 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: E Azoulay; S Chevret; G Leleu; F Pochard; M Barboteu; C Adrie; P Canoui; J R Le Gall; B Schlemmer Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2000-08 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Kathleen A Puntillo; Shoshana Arai; Neal H Cohen; Michael A Gropper; John Neuhaus; Steven M Paul; Christine Miaskowski Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2010-11 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Jean-Louis Vincent; John C Marshall; Silvio A Namendys-Silva; Bruno François; Ignacio Martin-Loeches; Jeffrey Lipman; Konrad Reinhart; Massimo Antonelli; Peter Pickkers; Hassane Njimi; Edgar Jimenez; Yasser Sakr Journal: Lancet Respir Med Date: 2014-04-14 Impact factor: 30.700
Authors: Charles L Sprung; Bara Ricou; Christiane S Hartog; Paulo Maia; Spyros D Mentzelopoulos; Manfred Weiss; Phillip D Levin; Laura Galarza; Veronica de la Guardia; Joerg C Schefold; Mario Baras; Gavin M Joynt; Hans-Henrik Bülow; Georgios Nakos; Vladimir Cerny; Stephan Marsch; Armand R Girbes; Catherine Ingels; Orsolya Miskolci; Didier Ledoux; Sudakshina Mullick; Maria G Bocci; Jakob Gjedsted; Belén Estébanez; Joseph L Nates; Olivier Lesieur; Roshni Sreedharan; Alberto M Giannini; Lucía Cachafeiro Fuciños; Christopher M Danbury; Andrej Michalsen; Ivo W Soliman; Angel Estella; Alexander Avidan Journal: JAMA Date: 2019-11-05 Impact factor: 56.272
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: Thanh H Neville; Zachary Taich; Anne M Walling; Danielle Bear; Deborah J Cook; Chi-Hong Tseng; Neil S Wenger Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2022-05-17 Impact factor: 6.473
Authors: Spyros D Mentzelopoulos; Su Chen; Joseph L Nates; Jacqueline M Kruser; Christiane Hartog; Andrej Michalsen; Nikolaos Efstathiou; Gavin M Joynt; Suzana Lobo; Alexander Avidan; Charles L Sprung Journal: Crit Care Date: 2022-04-13 Impact factor: 9.097