MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3212630148 · doi:10.1002/gps.5654

Invited letter: Integrated palliative care in a geriatric mental health setting during the COVID‐19 pandemic

2021· letter· en· W3212630148 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Cristina de Lasa, Eric E. Brown, Rebecca E. Colman, Tarek K. Rajji, Sarah Colman

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternational Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry · 2021
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiquePalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Établissements canadiensToronto Dementia Research AllianceSinai Health SystemUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPalliative carePandemicMedicineDementiaQuality of life (healthcare)Mental healthHealth carePopulationDiseasePsychiatryGerontologyNursingCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Environmental healthInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately impacted the elderly residents of congregate settings with respect to morbidity and mortality. The high rate of severe illness in this population necessitates timely and quality access to palliative care. There are a number of challenges facing teams working in geriatric mental health settings during the COVID-19 pandemic with respect to palliative care. We outline our experience as an example of changes made to improve the provision of pandemic palliative care on site in a geriatric mental health inpatient unit. Improving palliative care can help to increase the quality of care for patients beyond the pandemic, can increase the skill set of staff members, and help to prevent staff burnout. In Canada, like other jurisdictions, the majority of residents in LTC have major neurocognitive disorder, or dementia, a progressive, disabling, irreversible and ultimately fatal disease.6 Reported 6-month mortality rate among people with advanced dementia is 25%. There have been longstanding calls to expand palliative care to include advanced dementia.7 The culture in some Canadian LTC and inpatient geriatric psychiatric settings is to defer management of acute medical issues and palliation.8-10 Patients with dementia may have challenges expressing their wishes. As a result, patients are often sent to medical hospitals, at times against their best interests, with increased risk of nosocomial infection and functional decline, and at a high cost to the medical system.9 The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged healthcare systems internationally due to threatened and actual resource scarcity. Faced with the potential need to ration critical care resources, clear advance directives with respect to life-sustaining care are necessary. Defaulting to intensive life-sustaining therapy (e.g., CPR) to all patients without their truly informed consent may be harmful. The ethical principle of non-maleficence demands that we protect such vulnerable people from dying in this uncomfortable way.5 Given these considerations, along with changes in the risk–benefit ratio during this pandemic, many institutions have had to pivot to be able to provide dignified death within their walls. Here we report our local experience in hopes that it will be useful for others in international settings, given the global context of the pandemic and universal ethical principles involved. Our setting is the 48-bed geriatric mental health unit at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, an academic mental health hospital in Toronto, Canada. Our patient population resembles LTC homes, with approximately half of patients admitted for behavioural symptoms of dementia, many being residents of LTC or retirement homes. Lengths of stay are months to years, mirroring LTC homes rather than general psychiatry inpatient units. As of September 2021, we have had 111 COVID-19-positive cases within the hospital. Six of these occurred on our unit in April 2020. Of these six, one required ICU admission. Another was provided comfort-based care on site consistent with the substitute decision-maker's (SDM) decisions and died within 3 weeks of symptom onset. At the time, there were concerns about lack of medical hospital space. This led to a broader acceptance of the idea that patients may die at our facility, accelerating our efforts upskill capacity to integrate palliative care in our setting. We integrated a clinical frailty scale in goals of care discussions to assist families in deciding between life-prolonging treatments and comfort-based approaches.11, 12 Using elements of the palliative care pandemic framework set out by Arya et al.13 we developed a plan to address 'stuff, staff, space and systems', the need for sedation and communication, with minimal additional expenses. We developed an electronic order set to standardize the provision of palliative care for those not frequently using those skills (Table 1). We reviewed local hospital palliative order sets and elicited interdisciplinary feedback. We collaborated with our pharmacists to ensure an adequate supply of medications and obtained specialized equipment such as butterflies for subcutaneous medication administration. We developed a collaborative, working relationship with a local palliative care team for virtual support to our front-line physicians. A medical mobile team of two nurses with palliative care expertise provided nursing staff with bedside support. Palliative care staff training was provided by nurse educators. Our hospital's Resuscitation Status for Inpatients Policy helped guide our clinicians in addressing relevant clinical, legal and ethical issues whereby different levels of medical care could be clearly requested by the patient or, if incapable, the SDM. Discussions about goals of care were held with patients, family and SDMs following the principles of shared decision-making. We set up the conversation and shared information and prognosis. We explored goals, fears, and strengths and provided a summary. We documented the conversation and resuscitation status in the electronic medical record. We increased communication among the clinical team through daily 'huddles' to discuss concerns and ensure proper provision of palliation. During hospital-wide grand rounds, we shared our experiences to promote a more palliative-friendly culture. The COVID-19 pandemic brought to the forefront institutional gaps in palliative care, such as insufficient goals of care discussions and lack of skill to provide palliative care on site. The acute need threatened by the pandemic served as a 'burning platform' to accelerate change in hospital culture. We realized that the risk of sending some patients to medical hospital may outweigh benefits. We acknowledged that death on the unit may be a preferred outcome by some patients and families. We adapted quickly to increase our comfort in managing end-of-life treatment. The issues facing our LTC homes and psychiatric hospitals in Canada were similar internationally.2 As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to impact residents in our inpatient setting, as in LTC and other congregate settings in which people with dementia reside, integrated palliative care services will be needed. Failing to properly address patients' goals of care and to provide effective palliation will compound the tragedy of this pandemic. By upskilling and adapting, we will be better prepared for future pandemics or new cycles of the present one. Our experience attests to the feasibility of rising to this mission. This research received no specific grant from any funding agency, commercial or not-for-profit sectors. The authors declare no conflict of interests. Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Éditorial · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,023
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,048

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,016
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,001
Communication savante0,0020,004
Science ouverte0,0020,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0230,018
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0140,007

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,059
Tête enseignante GPT0,397
Écart entre enseignants0,338 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreÉditorial

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations5
Publié2021
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueInternational Journal of Geriatric PsychiatryMême sujetPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesTravaux en français237 207