OBJECTIVE: To understand multidisciplinary healthcare clinicians\' meaningful and challenging experiences providing spiritual care to patients with cancer and their care partners.
METHODS: Multidisciplinary clinicians who participated in a communication training program supported by the National Cancer Institute or a palliative care training for nurses (N = 257) responded to two, open-ended questions about meaningful and challenging experiences of providing spiritual care. A thematic analysis of responses using an iterative, inductive approach was conducted until saturation was reached.
RESULTS: Participants from nursing (68%), social work (22%), and chaplaincy (10%) responded to open-ended survey questions. Three themes related to meaningful experiences of providing spiritual care emerged: building authentic interpersonal connection with patients and care partners; creating intentional space for patients and care partners to inform spiritual care; and actively supporting patients and care partners in their processes with spirituality. Three themes related to challenging experiences of providing spiritual care emerged: contextual factors and clinical circumstances complicate provision of spiritual care; facing barriers to providing high-quality, patient-centered care; and navigating ethical and logistical issues that affect spiritual and other care.
CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians derive meaning from a range of experiences throughout their provision of spiritual care to patients with cancer. However, they also face many challenges in delivering person-centered spiritual care in cancer settings, with some challenges reflecting significant gaps in spiritual care knowledge and training. Findings can guide future training and educational endeavors for multidisciplinary clinicians in the domain of spiritual care.

People with a substance use disorder (SUD) have shortened lifespans due to complications from their substance use and challenges engaging with traditional health care settings and institutions. This impact on life expectancy is especially prominent in patients with co-occurring SUDs and cancer, and often has a much worse prognosis from the cancer than a similar patient without a SUD. Palliative care teams are experts in serious illness communication and symptom management and have become increasingly embedded in the routine care of patients with cancer. We argue that the skill set of palliative care teams is uniquely suited for addressing the needs of this oft marginalized group. We provide a comprehensive review of tools for addressing these needs, including medications that can both treat pain and opioid use disorder (OUD), and highlight psychosocial approaches to treating patients with OUD and cancer in a way that is respectful and effective. Using a trauma informed framework, we focus on the application of harm reduction principles from addiction medicine and the principles of clear communication, accompaniment, and emotional presence from palliative care to maximize support. We also focus on ways to reduce stigma in the delivery of care, by providing language that reduces barriers and increases patient engagement. Finally, we describe a clinic embedded within our institution\'s cancer center which aims to serve patients with cancer and SUDs, built on the framework of harm reduction, accompaniment and trauma informed care (TIC). Overall, we aim to provide context for addressing the common challenges that arise with patients with cancer and OUD, including the direct impact of psychosocial stress on substance use and cancer treatment, delays in disease directed treatment that can potentially impact further treatment options and outcomes, challenging pain management due to greater opioid debt, and potential loss of primary coping mechanism through substance use in the face of potential terminal diagnosis.

Background: For patients with serious illnesses, one aim of palliative care services is to reduce the frequency and severity of hospital-based episodes of care. Since hospital-alternative palliative care may consume costly resources, providers need to efficiently target high-intensity services toward those most at risk for such adverse episodes of care. Objective: Our objective was to investigate progressively more restrictive diagnosis-based indications of serious illness as used to prospectively identify patients with higher average rates of hospitalization. Design/Setting: We designed an observational cohort quality improvement study using historical Medicare claims records to evaluate diagnostic inclusion criteria for targeting palliative and serious illness care resources. We first isolated a Seriously Ill Population (SIP) and then defined More SIP and Most SIP subgroups. Measurements: Our primary outcome measure was the 2019 acute-care count of hospitalizations for patients in the SIP, More SIP, and Most SIP subgroups, respectively. Results: The More SIP and Most SIP subgroups exhibited higher hospitalization rates. However, they also excluded progressively more seriously ill patients who did experience hospitalizations. In addition, almost half of the Most SIP subgroup were not hospitalized at all, despite having an average hospitalization rate greater than one. Conclusion:Allocating resources (personnel and services) toward reducing hospitalizations when almost half of the targeted population never goes to the hospital could result in unnecessary expenditures and exclude patients that could potentially benefit. Engaging community-based services to detect changes in status could provide supplemental indications of when and for whom to target palliative care resources.

UNASSIGNED: Palliative care affords numerous benefits, including improvements in symptom management, mental health, and quality of life, financial savings, and decreased mortality. Yet palliative care is poorly understood and often erroneously viewed as end-of-life care and hospice. Barriers for better education of the public about palliative care and its benefits include shortage of healthcare providers specializing in palliative care and generalist clinicians\' lack of knowledge and confidence to discuss this topic and time constraints in busy clinical settings.
UNASSIGNED: Explore and compare the knowledge, values, and practices of community-dwelling adults 19 years and older from Nebraska about serious illness and end-of-life healthcare options.
UNASSIGNED: Secondary analysis of cross-sectional data collected in 2022 of 635 adults. We examined the fifth wave (2022) of a multiyear survey focusing on exploring Nebraskans\' understanding of and preferences related to end-of-life care planning.
UNASSIGNED: Descriptive statistics and chi-square tests to compare results between groups. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses examine associations of variables as to knowledge of hospice and palliative care.
UNASSIGNED: While 50% of respondents had heard a little or a lot about palliative care, 64% either did not know or were not sure of the difference between palliative care and hospice. Those who reported being in poor health were not more likely to know the difference between palliative care and hospice compared to those reporting being in fair, good, or excellent health.
UNASSIGNED: This study offers insight into the knowledge and attitudes about palliative care among community-dwelling adults, 19 years and older living in Nebraska. More effort is needed to communicate what palliative care is, who can receive help from it, and why it is not only for people at end of life. Advance care planning discussions can be useful in offering clarity.

UNASSIGNED: System level demands and interpersonal barriers can disrupt nurse delivery of high-quality information at discharge, which can contribute to a lack of caregiver preparedness to manage care of the patient and ultimately affect patient health.
UNASSIGNED: To synthesize evidence on effective nurse communication with informal caregivers during hospital discharge of adult patients with cognitive decline or Alzheimer\'s disease and related dementia.
UNASSIGNED: A scoping review of inpatient nurse communication with informal caregivers.
UNASSIGNED: Collected research (published between 2011 and 2023) from three databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL), along with a separate search for gray literature (N = 18), to extract and synthesize recommended communication practices evidenced to improve the nurse care experience and support caregiver activation and preparedness.
UNASSIGNED: Extraction synthesis of strategies resulted in two themes with corresponding sub-themes: Support (Information exchange, Space and time to determine preparedness, and Positive reinforcement of caregiver efforts) and Structure (Setting shared expectations, Informational resources, and Standardization).
UNASSIGNED: We offer practical recommendations for both interpersonal and policy level facilitation of nurse delivery of high-quality information at discharge to caregivers of patients with serious illness.

BACKGROUND: General practice is often recommended as an ideal setting to initiate advance care planning (ACP), but uptake of ACP in this setting is low. ACP-GP is a complex intervention to facilitate ACP for patients with chronic, life-limiting illness in Belgian general practice. It aims to increase patient ACP engagement and general practitioner (GP) ACP self-efficacy. In a cluster-randomized controlled trial, the intervention was not superior to control in increasing these outcomes. A parallel process evaluation aimed to enhance understanding of how the intervention was implemented, and which factors might have influenced trial results.
METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods process evaluation following the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. Data sources include recruitment and implementation monitoring, questionnaires for patients and GPs, and semi-structured (focus group) interviews with patients and GPs. Questionnaire data were analyzed descriptively. Qualitative data were first analyzed inductively; themes were then assigned deductively to RE-AIM dimensions.
RESULTS: Thirty-five GPs and 95 patients were recruited to the trial; GP reach was low. Sixteen GPs and 46 patients provided questionnaire data at 3 months post-baseline; qualitative data were transcribed for 14 GPs and 11 patients. Adoption of intervention components was moderate to good, with the exception of the documentation template for GPs. Interviews revealed varying patient attitudes towards ACP, but patients nonetheless emphasized that conversations made them feel reassured. GPs especially valued a positive framing of ACP. When adopted, the intervention was well-implemented and participant satisfaction was high. However, intention for maintenance was moderate, with GPs raising questions of how to sustainably implement ACP conversations in the future.
CONCLUSIONS: Implementing the complex ACP-GP intervention in general practice is feasible, and can be successful. However, the implementation process is challenging and the sustainability is suboptimal. Our findings will guide future research and recommendations for facilitating and implementing ACP in general practice.
BACKGROUND: ISRCTN12995230; prospectively registered on 19/06/2020.

Objective: The objective of this study was to examine the association between portal use and end-of-life (EOL) outcomes in the last year of life. Methods: A retrospective cohort (n = 6,517) study at Kaiser Permanente Colorado among adults with serious illness deceased between January 1, 2016, and June 30, 2019. Portal use was categorized into engagement types: no use, nonactive, active without a provider, and active with a provider. EOL outcomes were hospitalizations in the month before death, last-year advance directive completion, and hospice use. Association between EOL outcomes and levels of portal use was assessed using χ2 statistics and generalized linear models. Results: Higher portal engagement types were associated with higher rates of hospitalizations (p = 0.0492), advance directive completion (p = 0.0226), and hospice use (p = 0.0070). Conclusion: Portal use in the last year of life was associated with increases in a poor EOL outcome, hospitalizations, and beneficial EOL outcomes, advance directives, and hospice care.

BACKGROUND: Older LGBTQIA+ patients face discrimination in healthcare and therefore are sometimes reluctant to engage and interact with healthcare providers. This report explores whether a large medically-based internet platform can be used to engage these patients and describes preferable methods for doing so.
METHODS: This study used Mayo Clinic Connect, a continuously monitored, internet-based social media platform of 100,000-plus users. Participants completed a brief on-line survey to ensure their study eligibility. No patient-identifying data was asked. Participants then were to call in by phone during specified day time hours for a 45-minute qualitative interview. Alternatively, as a second subsequent option, they were to complete an on-line typed response to 4 questions about their health and healthcare. No temporal overlap occurred between the availability of the phone interview option and the typed-in response option.
RESULTS: For the phone interviews, 17 of 64 individuals were deemed eligible, but no individual called in to be interviewed. In contrast, for the typed-in response option, 20 of 37 individuals were eligible and provided comments.
CONCLUSIONS: A large medically-based internet platform can be used to engage older LGBTQIA+ patients, but the use of typed-in comments appears more successful, presumably because of greater anonymity and convenience.

UNASSIGNED: Timely palliative care and surgical interventions improve symptoms, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and reduce medical cost for seriously ill adults at end of life (EOL). However, there is still poor delivery and underutilization of these palliative services. We hypothesize that the sub-optimal delivery is due to limited understanding among healthcare providers.
UNASSIGNED: A nationwide cross-sectional online survey was conducted among primary and tertiary healthcare providers. The survey assessed challenges faced, palliative education, confidence in managing palliative patients, and knowledge on palliative surgery. Overall palliative care awareness and knowledge was assessed using a 6-point score. Likelihood of considering various palliative interventions at EOL was also determined using a threshold score (higher score = higher threshold).
UNASSIGNED: There were 145 healthcare providers who completed the survey (81.9% response rate); majority reported significant challenges in providing various aspects of palliative care: 57% (n = 82) in the provision of emotional support. Sixty-nine percent (n = 97) in managing social issues, and 71% (n = 103) in managing family expectations. Most expressed inadequate palliative care training in both under-graduate and post-graduate training and lack confidence in managing EOL issues. Up to 57% had misconceptions regarding potential benefits, morbidity and mortality after palliative surgery. In general, most providers had high thresholds for Intensive Care Unit admissions and palliative surgery, and were more likely to recommend endoscopic or interventional radiology procedures at EOL.
UNASSIGNED: Healthcare providers in Singapore have poor knowledge and misconceptions about palliative care and surgery. Improving awareness and education among those caring for seriously ill adults is essential.

Introduction: Learning expert communication skills is a core educational goal within palliative care training, yet there are few communication-based educational tools specifically designed for specialty-trained palliative care providers. Objective: To develop and implement a tool to facilitate effective learning of serious illness communication for hospice and palliative medicine fellows. Methods: A novel formative assessment tool was developed within the UCLA Palliative Care Fellowship program, and utilized throughout the academic year on a weekly basis. Focus groups were held for fellows and faculty separately at the end of the academic year in order to gain insight into the experience and effectiveness of the tool. Focus group transcripts were analyzed through thematic analysis. Results: There was a 47% participation rate in the focus groups (n = 7). Qualitative analysis demonstrated positive impact of the tool in identifying learning goals, improving quality of feedback, and in standardizing language around advanced communication skills, with most value in the first half of the fellowship year. Some aspects of the tool were found to increase feedback anxiety, including the competency scoring component, frequency of use, and utilization with individual patient encounters. Conclusion: This novel communication tool provides an important addition to serious illness communication training of specialist palliative care providers, in creating a shared mental model for naming and organizing skills, as well as generating specific high quality learning goals and feedback. Preliminary feedback from our pilot implementation phase provided important information about how to refine the tool and remove components that unnecessarily added to feedback anxiety.